Abstract
The introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) has improved the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention by addressing the issue of neointimal proliferation, a pathology contributing to restenosis. First-generation stents eluting sirolimus or paclitaxel were joined by second-generation stents, such as the everolimus-and the zotarolimus-eluting stents, promising increased safety and efficacy. As a result, there is a plethora of drug-eluting stents available, with differences in the stent platform, the polymer coating and the eluted drug, which translate into differences in biological markers of efficacy, such as late loss. However, it remains controversial whether these discrepancies have an impact on clinical markers of safety and efficacy, or if the improved efficacy of DES is a class effect. This article reviews the differences between DES by looking into the biological differences and into trials and registries of DES.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 402-408 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | American Journal of the Medical Sciences |
| Volume | 342 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 2011 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Drugeluting stents
- Percutaneous coronary intervention
- Restenosis
- Stent thrombosis
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Differences in drug-eluting stents used in coronary artery disease'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver