Abstract 19047: Comparison of Drug-Eluting Stent With Bare-Metal Stent Implantation in Femoropopliteal Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Zainali Chunawala, Aman Goyal, Vikash Jaiswal, Issam Moussa, Atif Hassan, Kirtipal Bhatia, Arman Qamar- Physiology (medical)
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Introduction: Trials comparing drug eluting stent (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal artery disease (FPAD) have shown variable results. Data indicating clear patency benefit of DES has not been definitively demonstrated.
Methods: Medline, Embase, & Cochrane Central databases were searched to identify previous studies comparing efficacy of drug eluting stent versus bare metal stents in treatment of FPAD. The primary outcome of interest was risk of restenosis. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, stent fracture, target vessel revascularization and primary patency. Odds ratios (OR) were pooled using a random-effect model while heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the Higgins I 2 value.
Results: A total of 7 studies (5 RCTs and 2 retrospective cohorts) with 1786 patients were included in our analyses. The risk of target vessel revascularization was significantly reduced with the use of DES (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.98, I 2 = 0) as compared with BMS. However, there was no significant difference observed in risk of restenosis (OR: 0.83, 95% CI 0.59-1.16), primary patency (OR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.91-1.29), stent fracture (OR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.27-2.67) and all-cause mortality (OR: 1.65, 95% CI 0.71-3.85).
Conclusion: The risk of target vessel revascularization was significantly reduced with the use of DES implantation in patients with FPAD. However, DES does not seem to provide much benefit in terms of clinical outcomes. Further larger RCTs are needed to provide more evidence in the comparison between DES and BMS for FPAD.