论文部分内容阅读
Background Several clinical trials have shown that rapamycin-eluting stents significantly reduce the risk of restenosisafter percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI).The Firebird stent and the Excel stent(coated with bioabsorbablepolymer)are two different types of rapamycin-eluting stents made in China,both have been recently approved for clinicaluse in China by State Food and Drug Administration.However,it is unclear whether there are differences in safety andefficacy between the two types of stents in daily practice.Methods In the month of June 2006,a total of 190 consecutive patients were treated exclusively with Firebird stents(n=93,Firebird group)or Excel stents(n=97,Excel group)in our center and were included in this study.The frequency ofmajor adverse cardiac events(MACE,a composite of death,myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization),binary restenosis,and late lumen loss and stent thrombosis during a six-month follow-up period were compared betweenthe two groups.Results Patient and lesion characteristics were comparable between the groups.Major adverse cardiac event rateswere low in hospital and at 6 months(2.1% in the Excel group and 0% in the Firebird group,P>0.05).The 6-monthangiographic in-stent restenosis rate was 0% in both groups,with an associated late loss of(0.15±0.21)mm versus(0.14±0.20)mm(P=0.858)and the in-segment restenosis rate was also 0% for the Excel group and the Firebird group.There was no definite stent thrombosis identified in either group during the six-month follow-up period and only onepatient in the Excel group had probable stent thrombosis in hospital,Conclusions Results from this mid-term,single-center study showed that both of the Firebird and the Excel rapamycineluting stent had similar effects on reducing the incidence of MACE and the risk of restenosis(both in-stent andin-segment binary restenosis)after PCI in daily practice.
Background Several clinical trials have shown that rapamycin-eluting stents significantly reduce the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The Firebird stent and the Excel stent (coated with bioabsorbable polymer) are two different types of rapamycin-eluting stents made in China, both have been recently recently approved for clinical use in China by the State Food and Drug Administration. However, it is unclear whether there are differences in safety andefficacy between the two types of stents in daily practice. Methods In the month of June 2006, a total of 190 consecutive patients were treated exclusively with Firebird stents (n = 93, Firebird group) or Excel stents (n = 97, Excel group) in our center and were included in this study. The frequency of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization), binary restenosis, and late lumen loss and stent thrombosis during a six-month follow-up period were compared betweenthe two groups .Re sults Patient and lesion characteristics were comparable between the groups. Major adverse cardiac event rateswere low in hospital and at 6 months (2.1% in the Excel group and 0% in the Firebird group, P> 0.05). The 6-monthangiographic in-stent restenosis rate was 0% in both groups, with an associated late loss of (0.15 ± 0.21) mm versus (0.14 ± 0.20) mm (P = 0.858) and the in-segment restenosis rate was also 0% for the Excel group and the Firebird group. There was no positive stent thrombosis identified in either group during the six-month follow-up period and only onepatient in the Excel group had probable stent thrombosis in hospital, Conclusions Results from this mid-term, single-center study showed that that both of the Firebird and the Excel rapamycineluting stent similar similar on reducing the incidence of MACE and the risk of restenosis (both in-stent and in-segment binary restenosis) after PCI in daily practice.