title: Drug-eluting stents compared to bare-metal stents improve short-term survival in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a nationwide prospective analysis of the AMIS Plus registry.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Recently, it has been suggested that the type of stent used in primary percutaneous coronary interventions (pPCI) might impact upon the outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Indeed, drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce neointimal hyperplasia compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). Moreover, the later generation DES, due to its biocompatible polymer coatings and stent design, allows for greater deliverability, improved endothelial healing and therefore less restenosis and thrombus generation. However, data on the safety and performance of DES in large cohorts of AMI is still limited.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To compare the early outcome of DES vs. BMS in AMI patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  This was a prospective, multicentre analysis containing patients from 64 hospitals in Switzerland with AMI undergoing pPCI between 2005 and 2013. The primary endpoint was in-hospital all-cause death, whereas the secondary endpoint included a composite measure of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) of death, reinfarction, and cerebrovascular event.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of 20,464 patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI and enrolled to the AMIS Plus registry, 15,026 were referred for pPCI and 13,442 received stent implantation. 10,094 patients were implanted with DES and 2,260 with BMS. The overall in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients with DES compared to those with BMS implantation (2.6% vs. 7.1%,p < 0.001). The overall in-hospital MACCE after DES was similarly lower compared to BMS (3.5% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for all confounding covariables, DES remained an independent predictor for lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.51,95% CI 0.40-0.67, p < 0.001). Since groups differed as regards to baseline characteristics and pharmacological treatment, we performed a propensity score matching (PSM) to limit potential biases. Even after the PSM, DES implantation remained independently associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.76, p < 0.001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In unselected patients from a nationwide, real-world cohort, we found DES, compared to BMS, was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and MACCE. The identification of optimal treatment strategies of patients with AMI needs further randomised evaluation; however, our findings suggest a potential benefit with DES.
authors.forename: Milosz
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Jaguszewski
authors.forename: Dragana
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Radovanovic
authors.forename: Brahmajee K
authors.initials: BK
authors.lastname: Nallamothu
authors.forename: Philip
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Urban
authors.affiliation: Divison of Cardiology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne. paul.erne@erne-net.ch.
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Erne
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D054855:Drug-Eluting Stents / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009203:Myocardial Infarction / Q000401:mortality* / Q000628:therapy*; D062645:Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000401:mortality; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D012042:Registries; D012307:Risk Factors; D015607:Stents / Q000009:adverse effects*; D013557:Switzerland; D016896:Treatment Outcome