Frequency, predictors, and outcomes of drug-eluting stent utilization in patients with high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.

Despite the established benefit of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in improving clinical and angiographic outcomes in pivotal, randomized trials, relatively little is known regarding the frequency and patterns of DES use in clinical practice. To characterize DES use in a broad, unselected high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome population, we evaluated the frequency, patterns, and predictors of DES use among patients in the Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines (CRUSADE) Quality Improvement Initiative who were selected to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. Of 8,852 patients with high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes who underwent percutaneous revascularization at 262 hospitals between October 2003 and June 2004, 5,858 (66.2%) were treated with DESs and 2,994 (33.8%) were not. During a 9-month period, DES use increased considerably from 52.6% of cases in October 2003 to 78.5% in June 2004. Compared with the bare metal stent cohort, patients receiving DESs were more likely to be women and to have private insurance, but were less likely to present with positive cardiac markers or ST-segment depression. In adjusted analysis, death and recurrent infarction were significantly lower among the patients with a DES, yet early revascularization and treatment with guideline-recommended therapies were less frequent. In a multivariate model, significant (p <0.05) predictors of DES use included hyperlipidemia, elevated systolic blood pressure, private insurance, and treatment at a larger hospital. In conclusion, these findings not only identified differences in the selection and treatment of patients receiving bare metal stents versus DESs, but also demonstrated the increasing use of DESs in higher risk patients who have previously been excluded from randomized, pivotal trials.

Duke Scholars

Author Matthew Todd Roe Medicine, Cardiology