Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bare Metal Stents Versus Drug Eluting Stents: Where Do We Stand in 2015?

  • Coronary Artery Disease (D Feldman and V Voudris, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

The development of bare metal stent (BMS) was a major advancement over plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) in the management of symptomatic coronary artery disease. BMS prevented restenosis by attenuating early arterial recoil and contraction; both seen commonly after POBA. However, the rate of clinically indicated target lesion repeat revascularization due to a process of in-stent restenosis (ISR) at 1 year remained relatively high (10 to 20 %), often due to excessive neointimal growth (Fischman et al. N Engl J Med. 331:496, 1994; Serruys et al. N Engl J Med. 331:489, 1994; Cutlip et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 40:2082, 2002). Stents with drug elution technology (DES) were developed to reduce the relatively high rate of ISR and subsequent repeat revascularization seen with BMS. Clinical trials have confirmed a reduction of as much as 50 to 70 % in target lesion revascularization by DES compared to BMS. These findings have led to the preferential use of DES in the majority of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, as DES require a longer period of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to prevent stent thrombosis, DES are not appropriate for all patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as:• Of importance

  1. Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:496.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:489.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cutlip DE, Chauhan MS, Baim DS, et al. Clinical restenosis after coronary stenting: perspectives from multicenter clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:2082.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1994;331(8):489–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1994;331(8):496–501.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rodriguez A, Boullon F, Perez-Balino N, Paviotti C, Liprandi MI, Palacios IF. Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4):1060–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Alderman EL, Kip KE, Whitlow PL, et al. Native coronary disease progression exceeds failed revascularization as cause of angina after five years in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(4):766–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Serruys PW, Ong AT, van Herwerden LA, et al. Five-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease: the final analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS) randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(4):575–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. The SoS Investigators. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360(9338):965–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hannan EL, Racz MJ, Walford G, et al. Long-term outcomes of coronary-artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(21):2174–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1315–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:221–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bangalore S, Kumar S, Fusaro M, et al. Short- and long-term outcomes with drug-eluting and bare-metal coronary stents: a mixed-treatment comparison analysis of 117,762 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials. Circulation. 2012;125:2873–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Dec 13.

  15. Parikh PB, Jeremias A, Naidu SS, et al. Determinants of bare-metal stent use in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol. 2013;25(3):114–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bangalore S, Amoroso N, Fusaro M, et al. Outcomes with various drug-eluting or bare metal stents in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: a mixed treatment comparison analysis of trial level data from 34,068 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(4):378–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grube E, Silber S, Hauptmann KE, et al. TAXUS I: six- and twelve-month results from a randomized, double-blind trial on a slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent for de novo coronary lesions. Circulation. 2003;107(1):38–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Serruys PW, Ong AT, Piek JJ, et al. A randomized comparison of a durable polymer Everolimus-eluting stent with a bare metal coronary stent: The SPIRIT first trial. EuroIntervention. 2005;1(1):58–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Stone GW, Midei M, Newman W, et al. Comparison of an everolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;299(16):1903–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kimura T, Morimoto T, Natsuaki M, Shiomi H, Igarashi K, Kadota K, et al. Comparison of everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting coronary stents: 1-year outcomes from the randomized evaluation of Sirolimus-Eluting Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stent Trial (RESET). Circulation. 2012.

  21. Bangalore S, Kumar S, Fusaro M, Amoroso N, Kirtane AJ, Byrne RA, et al. Outcomes with various drug eluting or bare metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: mixed treatment comparison analysis of 22 844 patient years of follow-up from randomised trials. BMJ. 2012;345:e5170.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mizoguchi T, Sawada T, Shinke T, Yamada S, Okamoto H, Kim SS, et al. Detailed comparison of intra-stent conditions 12months after implantation of everolimus-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or stable angina pectoris. Int J Cardiol. 2013.

  23. Meredith IT, Ormiston J, Whitbourn R, et al. First-in-human study of the Endeavor ABT-578-eluting phosphorylcholine-encapsulated stent system in de novo native coronary artery lesions: endeavor I Trial. EuroIntervent. 2005;1(2):157–64.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kandzari DE, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with native coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(12):2440–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Serruys PW, Silber S, Garg S, et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:136.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. von Birgelen C, Basalus MW, Tandjung K, et al. A randomized controlled trial in second-generation zotarolimus-eluting Resolute stents versus everolimus-eluting Xience V stents in real-world patients: the TWENTE trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. von Birgelen C, Sen H, Lam MK, et al. Third-generation zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting stents in all-comer patients requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention (DUTCH PEERS): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2014;383:413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Park KW, Kang SH, Kang HJ, et al. A randomized comparison of platinum chromium-based everolimus-eluting stents versus cobalt chromium-based Zotarolimus-Eluting stents in all-comers receiving percutaneous coronary intervention: HOST-ASSURE (harmonizing optimal strategy for treatment of coronary artery stenosis-safety & effectiveness of drug-eluting stents & anti-platelet regimen), a randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2805. In this Randomized trial involving 3755 all comers, platinum chromium (PtCr)-based everolimus-eluting stent (EES) was found to be noninferior to the cobalt chromium (CoCr)-based zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) subjects receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) defined as the composite of cardiac death, nonfatal target vessel–related myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Park KW, Lee JM, Kang SH, et al. Safety and efficacy of second-generation everolimus-eluting Xience V stents versus zotarolimus-eluting resolute stents in real-world practice: patient-related and stent-related outcomes from the multicenter prospective EXCELLENT and RESOLUTE-Korea registries. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:536.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Campeau L, Enjalbert M, Lesperance J, et al. The relation of risk factors to the development of atherosclerosis in saphenous vein bypass grafts and the progression of disease in the native circulation: a study 10 years after aortocoronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 1984;311(21):1329–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Savage MP, Douglas Jr JS, Fischman DL, et al. Stent placement compared with balloon angioplasty for obstructed coronary bypass grafts. Saphenous Vein De Novo Trial Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(11):740–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Costopoulos C, Latib A, Naganuma T, Sticchi A, Chieffo A, Figini F, et al. Comparison of first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents in saphenous vein grafts used as aorto-coronary conduits. Am J Cardiol. 2013;112:318e322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vermeersch P, Agostoni P, Verheye S, et al. Increased late mortality after sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in diseased saphenous vein grafts: results from the randomized DELAYED RRISC Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(3):261–7. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.05.010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mehilli J, Pache J, Abdel-Wahab M, Schulz S, Byrne RA, Tiroch K, et al. Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft lesions (ISAR-CABG): a randomised controlled superiority trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9796):1071–8. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61255-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wiisanen ME, Abdel-Latif A, Mukherjee D, Ziada KM. Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(12):1262–73. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2010.08.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Aggarwal V, Stanislawski MA, Maddox TM, Nallamothu BK, Gary G, Adams JC, et al. Safety and effectiveness of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein bypass graft percutaneous coronary interventions insights from the veterans affairs CART program. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(17):1825–36. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.06.1207.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Migliorini A, Moschi G, Vergara R, Parodi G, Carrabba N, Antoniucci D. Drug-eluting stent-supported percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total coronary occlusion. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;67:344–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Suttorp MJ, Laarman GJ, Rahel BM, et al. Primary stenting of totally occluded native coronary arteries II (PRISON II): a randomized comparison of bare metal stent implantation with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of total coronary occlusions. Circulation. 2006;114(9):921–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rubartelli P, Petronio AS, Guiducci V, et al. Comparison of sirolimus-eluting and bare metal stent for treatment of patients with total coronary occlusions: results of the GISSOC II-GISE multicentre randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2010;31(16):2014–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Valenti R, Vergara R, Migliorini A, Parodi G, Carrabba N, Cerisano G, et al. Predictors of reocclusion after successful drug-eluting stent-supported percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(5):545–50. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.10.036.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Park HJ, Kim HY, Lee JM, Choi YS, Park CS, Kim DB, et al. Randomized comparison of the efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stents vs. sirolimus-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention in chronic total occlusion–CAtholic Total Occlusion Study (CATOS) trial. Circ J. 2012;76(4):868–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Gilis-Siek N, Fijalkowski M, Jaguszewski M, Targonski R, Strozyk A, Cackowska M, et al. Major adverse cardiovascular events after drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with single chronic totalocclusion: a single-center registry. J Invasive Cardiol. 2013;25(11):567–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Saeed B, Kandzari DE, Agostoni P, Lombardi WL, Rangan BV, Banerjee S, et al. Use of drug-eluting stents for chronic total occlusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;77(3):315–32. doi:10.1002/ccd.22690.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kukreja N, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia H, et al. The risk of stent thrombosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with bare-metal and drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2009;2:534–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Vink MA, Dirksen MT, Suttorp MJ, Tijssen JG, van Etten J, Patterson MS, et al. 5-year follow-up after primary percutaneous coronary intervention with a paclitaxel-eluting stent versus a bare-metal stent in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv. 2011;4:24–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Brodie B, Pokharel Y, Fleishman N, Bensimhon A, Kissling G, Hansen C, et al. Very late stent thrombosis after primary percutaneous coronary intervention with bare-metal and drug-eluting stents for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv. 2011;4:30–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Garg A, Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Garberich RF, Patrick T, Charles H, et al. New generation drug-eluting stents for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a new paradigm for safety. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;84(6):955–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Sarno G, Lagerqvist B, Nilsson J, Frobert O, Hambraeus K, Varenhorst C, et al. Stent thrombosis in new-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(1):16–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Sabaté M, Räber L, Heg D, et al. Comparison of newer-generation drug-eluting with bare-metal stents in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pooled analysis of the EXAMINATION (clinical Evaluation of the Xience-V stent in Acute Myocardial INfArcTION) and COMFORTABLE-AMI (Comparison of Biolimus Eluted From an Erodible Stent Coating With Bare Metal Stents in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Trials. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7(1):55–63. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2013.07.012. In this randomized controlled trial Everolimus eluting stent compared with BMS in STEMI, over a 2-year follow-up EES use resulted in rates of target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(23):1773–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cannon L, et al. Comparison of a polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent with a stent in patients with complex coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;294(10):1215–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Pfisterer M, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Buser PT, et al. Late clinical events after clopidogrel discontinuation may limit the benefit of drug-eluting stents: an observational study of drug-eluting versus bare metal stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(12):2584–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lagerqvist B, James SK, Stenestrand U, et al. Longterm with drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in Sweden. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(10):1009–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Nordmann AJ, Briel M, Bucher HC. Mortality in randomized controlled trials comparing drug-eluting vs. stents in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2006;27(23):2784–814.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Stone GW, Moses JW, Ellis SG, et al. Safety and efficacy of sirolimus and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(10):998–1008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mauri L, Silbaugh TS, Garg P, et al. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(13):1330–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Mehran R, Baber U, Steg PG, et al. Cessation of dual antiplatelet treatment and cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PARIS): 2 year results from a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2013;382(9906):1714–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Feres F, Costa RA, Abizaid A, et al. Three vs twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after zotarolimus-eluting stents: the OPTIMIZE randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310(23):2510–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Yeung AC, Leon MB, Jain A, et al. Clinical evaluation of the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of de novo lesions in native coronary arteries: the RESOLUTE US clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57(17):1778–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Mauri L, Kereiakes DJ, Yeh RW, Driscoll-Shempp P, Cutlip DE, Steg PG, et al. Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stents. N Engl J Med. 2014. In this randomized trial comparing 12 months versus 20 months of Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after placement of a drug-eluting stent, longer duration of DAPT reduced the risks of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events but was associated with an increased risk of bleeding.

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Perwaiz M. Meraj reports grants and personal fees from Abiomed Inc., grants and personal fees from Medtronic Inc., grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific Inc.

Rajiv Jauhar reports grants and personal fees from Medtronic Inc., and Abbott Inc.

Avneet Singh declares no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, North Shore LIJ Health System, Hofstra – North Shore LIJ School of Medicine, 300 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY, 11030, USA

    Perwaiz M. Meraj MD, FACC, FSCAI, Rajiv Jauhar MD, FACC & Avneet Singh MD, FACC

Authors
  1. Perwaiz M. Meraj MD, FACC, FSCAI
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajiv Jauhar MD, FACC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Avneet Singh MD, FACC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Perwaiz M. Meraj MD, FACC, FSCAI.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Coronary Artery Disease

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Meraj, P.M., Jauhar, R. & Singh, A. Bare Metal Stents Versus Drug Eluting Stents: Where Do We Stand in 2015?. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 17, 39 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-015-0393-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-015-0393-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation