posted on 2011-08-05, 09:30authored byKamal Chitkara, Kushal Pujara
Over the past decade, the advent of drug-eluting stents (DES) has revolutionised the field of
interventional cardiology by having a major impact on patient care through their efficacy in reducing
the need for repeat revascularisation. A number of stents capable of delivering an anti-proliferative
agent designed to prevent neointimal hyperplasia, the principal mechanism of restenosis after
stenting, have been evaluated; four of these devices are currently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Bare metal stent (BMS) and first-generation DES, such as sirolimus-
eluting (SES-Cypher®) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES-Taxus®), have further improved results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by improving early results and reducing the risk of
restenosis. However, there is currently debate on the safety of these first-generation DES, given the potential for late stent thrombosis (LST), especially after discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy.
Second-generation DES, such as zotarolimus-eluting (ZES-Endeavor®) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES-Xience V®), are become available in the USA and/or Europe. Recently, long-term results
comparing DES with BMS in patients with ST-segment-elevation MI (STEMI) have raised some
questions about the long-term risks of the drug-eluting devices. It may be useful to pause, reflect for a moment, and consider some recent pertinent results regarding their wider use. This
systematic review tries to provide a concise and critical appraisal of the data available to compare
first and second generation stents especially to assess risk of stent thrombosis (ST) with second-
generation DES.
History
Citation
European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine, 2010, 1(2), pp.20-24.
The published version is also freely available and accessible from the publisher's webiste. The European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine is an Open Access journal.
This article is also freely available in PubMed.