Effects of Coronary Stents on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Broad-Based Clinical Practice | Cardiology | JAMA Internal Medicine | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Topol  EJ Coronary-artery stents: gauging, gorging, and gouging.  N Engl J Med. 1998;3391702- 1704Google ScholarCrossref
Fischman  DLLeon  MBBaim  DS  et al.  A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease.  N Engl J Med. 1994;331496- 501Google ScholarCrossref
Serruys  PWde Jaegere  PKiemeneij  F  et al. Benestent Study Group, A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease.  N Engl J Med. 1994;331489- 495Google ScholarCrossref
Serruys  PWvan Hout  BBonnier  H  et al.  Randomised comparison of implantation of heparin-coated stents with balloon angioplasty in selected patients with coronary artery disease (Benestent II).  Lancet. 1998;352673- 681Google ScholarCrossref
Versaci  FGaspardone  ATomai  FCrea  FChiariello  LGioffre  PA A comparison of coronary-artery stenting with angioplasty for isolated stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery.  N Engl J Med. 1997;336817- 822Google ScholarCrossref
Erbel  RHaude  MHopp  HW  et al.  Coronary-artery stenting compared with balloon angioplasty for restenosis after initial balloon angioplasty.  N Engl J Med. 1998;3391672- 1678Google ScholarCrossref
Antoniucci  DSantoro  GMBolognese  LValenti  RTrapani  MFazzini  PF A clinical trial comparing primary stenting of the infarct-related artery with optimal primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: results from the Florence Randomized Elective Stenting in Acute Coronary Occlusions (FRESCO) trial.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;311234- 1239Google ScholarCrossref
Schwartz  LBlew  BBui  S Intracoronary-stent placement for coronary artery disease.  Lancet. 1997;350113- 114Google ScholarCrossref
Not Available, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification.  Washington, DC Public Health Service, US Dept of Health and Human Services1988;
Bradbury  RCGolec  JHSteen  PM Relating hospital health outcomes and resource expenditures.  Inquiry. 1994;3156- 65Google Scholar
Anderson  HV Management of ischemic complications. Black  AJRAnderson  HVEllis  SGeds. Complications of Coronary Angioplasty New York, NY Marcel Dekker1991;88Google Scholar
Holmes  DR  JrKip  KEKelsey  SFDetre  KMRosen  AD Cause of death analysis in the NHLBI PTCA Registry: results and considerations for evaluating long-term survival after coronary interventions.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30881- 887Google ScholarCrossref
Mascioli  SRJacobs  DRJKottke  TE Diagnostic criteria for hospitalized acute myocardial infarction: the Minnesota experience.  Int J Epidemiol. 1989;1876- 83Google ScholarCrossref
Berlin  JAKimmel  SETen Have  TRSammel  MD An empirical comparison of several clustered data approaches under confounding due to cluster effects in the analysis of complications of coronary angioplasty.  Biometrics. 1999;55470- 476Google ScholarCrossref
Rubin  DB Estimating causal effects from large datasets using propensity scores.  Ann Intern Med. 1997;127757- 763Google ScholarCrossref
Jollis  JGAncukiewicz  MDeLong  ERPryor  DBMuhlbaier  LHMark  DB Discordance of databases designed for claims payment versus clinical information systems: implications for outcomes research.  Ann Intern Med. 1993;119844- 850Google ScholarCrossref
Hosmer  DWLemeshow  S Applied Logistic Regression.  New York, NY John Wiley & Sons Inc1989;140- 145
Royall  RM Model robust confidence intervals using maximum likelihood estimators.  Int Stat Rev. 1986;54221- 226Google ScholarCrossref
Schafer  JL Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data.  London, England Chapman & Hall1997;
Altmann  DBRacz  MBattleman  DS  et al.  Reduction in angioplasty complications after the introduction of coronary stents: results from a consecutive series of 2242 patients.  Am Heart J. 1996;132503- 507Google ScholarCrossref
Lindsay  JHong  MKPinnow  EEPichard  AD Effects of endoluminal coronary stents on the frequency of coronary artery bypass grafting after unsuccessful percutaneous transluminal coronary vascularization.  Am J Cardiol. 1996;77647- 649Google ScholarCrossref
Rill  VBrown  DL Practice of coronary angioplasty in California in 1995: comparison to 1989 and impact of coronary stenting [serial online].  Circulation. 1999;99E12Google ScholarCrossref
Lincoff  AMCaliff  RMMoliterno  DJ  et al.  Complementary clinical benefits of coronary-artery stenting and blockade of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptors.  N Engl J Med. 1999;341319- 327Google ScholarCrossref
Hong  MKPopma  JJBaim  DSYeh  WDetre  KMLeon  MB Frequency and predictors of major in-hospital ischemic complications after planned and unplanned new-device angioplasty from the New Approaches to Coronary Intervention (NACI) registry.  Am J Cardiol. 1997;8040K- 49KGoogle ScholarCrossref
Pepine  CJHolmes  DR  Jr Consensus statement: coronary artery stents.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28782- 794Google Scholar
Schomig  ANeumann  FJKastrati  A  et al.  A randomized comparison of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy after the placement of coronary-artery stents.  N Engl J Med. 1996;3341084- 1089Google ScholarCrossref
Leon  MBBaim  DSPopma  JJ  et al.  A clinical trial comparing three antithrombotic-drug regimens after coronary-artery stenting.  N Engl J Med. 1998;3391665- 1671Google ScholarCrossref
Piana  RNAhmed  WHChaitman  B  et al.  Effect of transient abrupt vessel closure during otherwise successful angioplasty for unstable angina on clinical outcome at six months.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;3373- 78Google ScholarCrossref
Hirshfeld  JW  JrSchwartz  JSJugo  R  et al.  Restenosis after coronary angioplasty: a multivariate statistical model to relate lesion and procedure variables to restenosis.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;18647- 656Google ScholarCrossref
Savage  MPDouglas  JSJFischman  DL  et al. Saphenous Vein De Novo Trial Investigators, Stent placement compared with balloon angioplasty for obstructed coronary bypass grafts.  N Engl J Med. 1997;337740- 747Google ScholarCrossref
De Gregorio  JKobayashi  YAlbiero  R  et al.  Coronary artery stenting in the elderly: short-term outcome and long-term angiographic and clinical follow-up.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32577- 583Google ScholarCrossref
Akiyama  TMoussa  IReimers  B  et al.  Angiographic and clinical outcome following coronary stenting of small vessels.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;321610- 1618Google ScholarCrossref
Pladevall  MGoff  DCNichaman  MZ  et al.  An assessment of the validity of ICD code 410 to identify hospital admissions for myocardial infarction: the Corpus Christi Heart Project.  Int J Epidemiol. 1996;25948- 952Google ScholarCrossref
Holmes  DR  JrTopol  EJAdelman  AGCohen  EACaliff  RM Randomized trials of directional coronary atherectomy: implications for clinical practice and future investigation.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994;24431- 439Google ScholarCrossref
Tcheng  JE Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors: putting the EPIC, IMPACT II, RESTORE, and EPILOG trials into perspective.  Am J Cardiol. 1996;7835- 40Google ScholarCrossref
Lauer  MATopol  EJCascade  EFKarweit  JALin  ND Percutaneous coronary intervention: changing practice patterns and outcomes 1995-1997 [abstract].  J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;3336AGoogle Scholar
Topol  EJSerruys  PW Frontiers in interventional cardiology.  Circulation. 1998;981802- 1820Google ScholarCrossref
Original Investigation
September 25, 2000

Effects of Coronary Stents on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Broad-Based Clinical Practice

Author Affiliations

From the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine (Drs Kimmel, Localio, and Strom and Mss Brensinger and Miles), Cardiovascular Division (Drs Kimmel and Hirshfeld) and Division of General Internal Medicine (Dr Strom), Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, and Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Pennsylvania Hospital (Dr Haber), Philadelphia.

Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(17):2593-2599. doi:10.1001/archinte.160.17.2593

Background  Although stents have been shown to reduce the need for repeated percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in randomized trials, the effects of stents in broad-based, diverse clinical practice have not been well studied, nor has their effect on subsequent myocardial infarction or cardiac death.

Methods  A retrospective cohort study was performed that included all 43 hospitals performing PCI in Pennsylvania in the last quarter of 1995, with the use of the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council database. All 5258 patients who underwent PCI, excluding those with previous PCI within the preceding 6 months, were included. The primary outcomes were in-hospital events (death or coronary bypass), 6-month revascularization rates, and 6-month rates of cardiac death or myocardial infarction.

Results  A total of 1240 patients (24%) had a stent procedure. Compared with nonstent procedures, stents reduced the risk of in-hospital events (multivariable odds ratio adjusted for patient and hospital level differences, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.97), primarily because of a 52% reduction in the need for coronary bypass. Stents also reduced the need for follow-up revascularization procedures (multivariable hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.87), primarily because of a 31% reduction in repeated PCI. However, stents had no effect on 6-month rate of myocardial infarction or cardiac death (multivariable hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.33).

Conclusions  Using stents decreases the need for repeated PCI in broad-based clinical practice, confirming results from randomized trials. However, this study did not detect any effect on subsequent myocardial infarction or cardiac death.