Appendix 1: Supplementary tables [posted as supplied by author] Table A. Details of MeSH Search Terms

Similar documents
Coronary Stent Choice in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

Drug Eluting Stents Sometimes Fail ESC Stockholm 29 Set 2010 Stent Thrombosis Alaide Chieffo

CYPHER (Polymer-based Sirolimus-eluting DES) New Stent Platforms. Campbell Rogers, M.D. Chief Technology Officer

Conflict of interest :None. Meta-analysis. Zhangwei Chen, MD

DES in Diabetic Patients

Smooth muscle pharmacology & interventional cardiology

Cost effectiveness of drug eluting coronary artery stenting in a UK setting: cost-utility study Bagust A, Grayson A D, Palmer N D, Perry R A, Walley T

Bern-Rotterdam Cohort Study

Supplementary Online Content

Supplementary Table S1: Proportion of missing values presents in the original dataset

Long-term (2 5 years) adverse clinical outcomes associated with ZES versus SES, PES and EES: A Meta-Analysis

BMS vs. DES vs. CABG

Supplementary Online Content

Supplementary appendix

Xinlin Zhang, Jun Xie, Guannan Li, Qinhua Chen, Biao Xu* Abstract. Introduction

Biosensors Lunch Symposium

ST-Elevation MI: Update on Bivalirudin and DES

SCAAR: Lower late and very late stent thrombosis rates with new generation drug eluting stents compared to bare metal stents

The MAIN-COMPARE Study

7-Year Follow-up From a Randomized Trial of Sirolimus-Eluting vs. Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease (RESET)

Clinical Study Age Differences in Long Term Outcomes of Coronary Patients Treated with Drug Eluting Stents at a Tertiary Medical Center

Clinical Study Everolimus-Eluting versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Abstract Background: Methods: Results: Conclusions:

Osler Journal Club Outcomes Research

1. Whether the risks of stent thrombosis (ST) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) differ from BMS and DES

Netzwerk-Meta-Analysen und indirekte Vergleiche: Erhoḧte (Un)Sicherheit?

Coronary Stents: Past, Present and Future

Moins de 6 mois d antiagrégants après DES?

A Large Prospective Randomized Trial of DES vs BMS in Patients with STEMI

New Generation Drug- Eluting Stent in Korea

Left Main PCI vs. CABG: Real World

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE GUIDANCE EXECUTIVE (GE)

ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 Randomized Trial. Zotarolimus- vs. Everolimus-Eluting Stents for Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Lesions

HCS Working Group Seminars Macedonia Pallas Hotel, Friday 21 st February Drug-eluting stents Are they all equal?

INDEX 1 INTRODUCTION DEVICE DESCRIPTION CLINICAL PROGRAM FIRST-IN-MAN CLINICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE AMAZONIA SIR STENT...

Interventional Cardiology

Three-Year Clinical Outcomes with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds: Results from the Randomized ABSORB III Trial Stephen G.

Review Article Comparison of 12-Month Outcomes with Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents: A Meta-Analysis

Supplementary Material to Mayer et al. A comparative cohort study on personalised

2-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Everolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice

DRUG ELUTING STENTS. Cypher Versus Taxus: Are There Differences? Introduction. Methods SIGMUND SILBER, M.D., F.E.S.C., F.A.C.C.

Role of Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndromes. Hossam Kandil,, MD. Professor of Cardiology Cairo University

Bifurcations Bad Krozingen I

Komplexe Koronarintervention heute: Von Syntax zu bioresorbierbaren Stents

Clinical Application of OCT in Stent Evaluation

LM stenting - Cypher

Supplementary Information for Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent

Long-Term Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization

stent (stent fracture) clopidogrel in stent restenosis drug eluting stent(des) (overlap) mail:

EXAMINATION trial. Manel Sabaté Hospital Clínic, Barcelona (On behalf of the Examination Investigators)

Rationale for Percutaneous Revascularization ESC 2011

Asian AMI Registry Session The 17 th Joint Meeting of Coronary Revascularization (JCR 2017) Busan, Korea Dec 8 th 2017

ANGIOPLASY SUMMIT 2007 TCT ASIA PACIFIC. Seoul, Korea: April The problem is exaggerated: Data from Real World Registries

Christian Spaulding. for the TYPHOON Investigators

EXCEL vs. NOBLE: How to Treat Left Main Disease in 2017 AATS International Cardiovascular Symposium December 8-9, 2017

Pravesh Kumar Bundhun 1, Chandra Mouli Yanamala 2 and Wei-Qiang Huang 1*

Update on Antiplatelet Therapy

The SORT OUT VI Trial

Nuo Li, Ye-Gui Yang and Meng-Hua Chen *

Drug eluting stents. Where are we now and what can we expect in 2003? Tony Gershlick Leicester

eluting Stents The SPIRIT Trials

Safety of Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndromes

PCI for Long Coronary Lesion

Long-term Outcomes of Paclitaxel-Eluting Versus Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis

Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound- Guided vs. Angiography-Guided Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation: the IVUS-XPL Randomized Clinical Trial

Medical therapy after angioplasty / stenting

The MAIN-COMPARE Registry

PTCA 1979: : I

Nine-year clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents for large coronary vessel lesions

PCI for LMCA lesions A Review of latest guidelines and relevant evidence

Journal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 47, No. 7, by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN /06/$32.

RESEARCH. Daniele Giacoppo, 1 Giuseppe Gargiulo, 1 Patrizia Aruta, 1 Piera Capranzano, 1,2 Corrado Tamburino, 1,2 Davide Capodanno 1,2.

STATINS EVALUATION IN CORONARY PROCEDURES AND REVASCULARIZATION

Resolute in Bifurcation Lesions: Data from the RESOLUTE Clinical Program

Using meta-regression analyses in addition to conventional systematic review methods to examine the variation in costeffectiveness

Summary HTA. Drug-eluting stents vs. coronary artery bypass-grafting. HTA-Report Summary. Gorenoi V, Dintsios CM, Schönermark MP, Hagen A

Mid-term results from real-world REPARA registry. Felipe Hernandez, on behalf of the REPARA investigators

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Lecture fees: AstraZeneca, Ely Lilly, Merck.

SeQuent Please World Wide Registry

What is the Optimal Triple Anti-platelet Therapy Duration in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Drug-eluting Stents Implantation?

Supplementary Online Content

Current Status of BioresorbableScaffolds: Moving Forward or Backwards?

A BS TR AC T. n engl j med 356;10 march 8,

Is the role of bivalirudin established?

OUTPATIENT ANTITHROMBOTIC MANAGEMENT POST NON-ST ELEVATION ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME. TARGET AUDIENCE: All Canadian health care professionals.

Bernard Chevalier Institut Jacques Cartier, Massy, France. Patrick W. Serruys Imperial College, London, UK Erasmus University MC, Netherlands

Drug-Coated Balloons for Small Coronary Artery Disease: BASKET-SMALL 2

Lisette Okkels Jensen

Kang Gao, Yiguang Sun * , Ming Yang, Ling Han, Liwei Chen, Wenze Hu, Ping Chen and Xiaohong Li

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes With Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents

ISAR-LEFT MAIN: A Randomized Clinical Trial on Drug-Eluting Stents for Unprotected Left Main Lesions

2010 Korean Society of Cardiology Spring Scientific Session Korea Japan Joint Symposium. Seoul National University Hospital Cardiovascular Center

Comparison of Bare metal Vs Drug eluting stents for in-stent Restenosis among Diabetics

Αγγειοπλαστική σε διαβητικούς ασθενείς

Stent Thrombosis: Patient, Procedural, and Stent Factors. Eugene Mc Fadden Cork, Ireland

Non-LM bifurcation studies of importance in 2011

eucalimus - First Experience

Optimal Duration of Clopidogrel Therapy with DES to Reduce Late Coronary Arterial Thrombotic Event. The DES LATE Trial

Smooth muscle pharmacology & interventional cardiology

Transcription:

Appendix 1: Supplementary tables [posted as supplied by author] Table A. Details of MeSH Search Terms Stent Bare Metal Stent Drug Eluting Stent MeSH terms Randomized controlled trial, clinical trial, Human, Diabetes, Bare metal stent, Vision, Bx velocity, Millenium, Multilink vision Randomized controlled trial, clinical trial, Human, Diabetes, Drug eluting stent, Eluting stent, Paclitaxel, Sirolimus, Everolimus, 1

Appendix Table B. Sensitivity Analysis: Select Outcomes in Trials with Low-bias Risk Reference Comparator TVR Death RR (95% Cr I) RR (95% Cr I) Bare Metal Sirolimus MI RR (95% Cr I) Any ST RR (95% Cr I) 0.37 (0.28, 0.46) 0.99 (0.72, 1.36) 0.75 (0.51, 1.03) 0.67 (0.34, 1.35) Paclitaxel 0.47 (0.35, 0.62) 1.01 (0.67, 1.44) 0.80 (0.52, 1.14) 0.83 (0.37, 1.69) Everolimus 0.30 (0.18, 0.45) 0.88 (0.42, 1.56) 0.49 (0.20, 0.94) 0.58 (0.18, 1.62) 0.60 (0.40, 0.93) 1.20 (0.62, 2.26) 2.52 (0.92, 7.01) 3.61 (0.81, 19.51) Sirolimus Paclitaxel 1.26 (1.00, 1.68) 1.01 (0.70, 1.39) 1.08 (0.72, 1.53) 1.19 (0.63, 2.43) Everolimus 0.81 (0.54, 1.17) 0.88 (0.45, 1.56) 0.64 (0.28, 1.24) 0.85 (0.32, 2.21) 1.61 (1.12, 2.47) 1.22 (0.65, 2.16) 3.33 (1.30, 8.41) 5.35 (1.40, 31.05) Paclitaxel Everolimus 0.63 (0.41, 0.91) 0.87 (0.44, 1.44) 0.61 (0.28, 1.12) 0.71 (0.26, 1.70) 1.28 (0.85, 1.94) 1.18 (0.62, 2.34) 3.12 (1.19, 8.01) 4.32 (1.18, 23.58) Everolimus 2.00 (1.24, 3.61) 1.37 (0.64, 3.34) 5.28 (1.68, 15.84) 6.16 (1.29, 40.22) Cr I = credibility interval; MI = myocardial infarction; ST = stent thrombosis; TVR= target vessel revascularization 2

Appendix Table C. Sensitivity Analysis: Select Outcomes in Non-ACS Trials Reference Comparator TVR Death RR (95% Cr I) RR (95% Cr I) Bare Metal Sirolimus MI RR (95% Cr I) Any ST RR (95% Cr I) 0.33 (0.22, 0.46) 0.94 (0.60, 1.45) 0.64 (0.38, 1.02) 0.61 (0.16, 1.84) Paclitaxel 0.41 (0.27, 0.57) 0.92 (0.57, 1.43) 0.69 (0.40, 1.13) 0.87 (0.25, 3.01) Everolimus 0.26 (0.14, 0.43) 0.79 (0.35, 1.66) 0.42 (0.13, 0.90) 0.54 (0.10, 2.59) 0.71 (0.38, 1.28) 1.27 (0.53, 2.97) 5.52 (1.08, 74.24) 7.41 (0.53, 130.50) Sirolimus Paclitaxel 1.21 (0.91, 1.63) 0.98 (0.66, 1.40) 1.07 (0.69, 1.65) 1.41 (0.69, 3.81) Everolimus 0.79 (0.48, 1.19) 0.84 (0.42, 1.55) 0.65 (0.23, 1.29) 0.86 (0.27, 3.18) 2.12 (1.20, 3.85) 1.35 (0.61, 2.93) 8.44 (1.93, 126.7) 11.36 (1.53, 171.30) Paclitaxel Everolimus 0.65 (0.38, 0.98) 0.86 (0.44, 1.56) 0.61 (0.22, 1.14) 0.62 (0.16, 2.02) 1.74 (0.95, 3.16) 1.39 (0.57, 3.04) 8.04 (1.71, 106.3) 7.99 (0.91, 120.1) Everolimus 2.67 (1.37, 5.76) 1.60 (0.58, 4.33) 13.52 (2.58, 240.5) 12.80 (1.29, 256.00) ACS = acute coronary syndromes; Cr I = credibility interval; MI = myocardial infarction; ST = stent thrombosis; TVR= target vessel revascularization 3

Appendix Table D. Direct comparison analysis for select outcomes (Random effects model) Treatment Control TVR Death MI Any ST RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) Sirolimus Bare Metal Def/Prob ST RR (95% CI) 0.41 (0.31, 0.54) 1.09 (0.78, 1.51) 0.79 (0.54, 1.15) 0.79 (0.41, 1.53) 0.80 (0.32, 2.02) Paclitaxel Bare Metal 0.55 (0.41, 0.73) 0.91 (0.60, 1.37) 0.78 (0.51, 1.20) 0.75 (0.33, 1.69) 0.69 (0.24, 1.94) Everolimus Bare Metal - - - - - Bare Metal 0.50 (0.23, 1.06) - - - - Paclitaxel Sirolimus 1.15 (0.87, 1.52) 1.05 (0.78, 1.42) 1.28 (0.85, 1.93) 1.22 (0.64, 2.30) 1.08 (0.24, 4.90) Everolimus Sirolimus 0.70 (0.47, 1.04) 0.43 (0.20, 0.94) 0.16 (0.03, 0.90) 0.67 (0.24, 1.88) 0.51 (0.13, 2.09) Sirolimus 2.01 (0.97, 4.14) 1.28 (0.74, 2.22) 3.35 (0.88, 12.67) 2.71 (0.60, 12.21) 1.02 (0.06, 16.26) Everolimus Paclitaxel 0.86 (0.63, 1.17) 1.36 (0.80, 2.31) 0.86 (0.55, 1.34) 0.79 (0.39, 1.61) 0.79 (0.39, 1.61) Paclitaxel 1.08 (0.67, 1.75) 0.81 (0.15, 4.40) 1.84 (0.43, 7.89) 4.06 (0.68, 24.43) 2.94 (0.31, 28.04) Everolimus - - - - - CI = confidence interval; MI = myocardial infarction; ST = stent thrombosis; TVR= target vessel revascularization 4

Appendix Table E. Between trial heterogeneity: Estimates of the between-trial variance τ 2 Outcome τ 2 τ 2 (Model Restricted to Low- τ 2 (Model Restricted to Trials (Overall Model) Bias Risk Trials) with Clopidogrel >6 m) Target Vessel Revascularization 0.03 0.03 0.05 Target Lesion Revascularization 0.08 0.11 0.13 Death 0.03 0.04 0.01 Myocardial Infarction 0.04 0.03 0.04 Any Stent Thrombosis 0.06 0.12 0.09 Definite Stent Thrombosis 0.19 0.39 0.21 Definite or Probable Stent Thrombosis 0.11 0.12 0.19 A τ 2 estimate of 0.04 is interpreted as a low, 0.14 as a moderate and 0.40 as a high degree of heterogeneity between trials. 5

Appendix Table F. Evaluation of model fit: Network of all trials Mean of residual N (%) of residuals Satisfactory Outcome N of Data Points deviance within ± 1.96 of SND Q-Q plot Target Vessel Revascularization 76 86 76 (100%) Yes Target Lesion Revascularization 76 87 76 (100%) Yes Death 70 66 69 (98.6%) Yes Myocardial Infarction 72 73 72 (100%) Yes Any Stent Thrombosis 72 58 71 (98.6%) Yes Definite Stent Thrombosis 66 48 65 (98.5%) Yes Definite or Probable Stent Thrombosis 76 54 76 (100%) Yes The model was considered to provide an adequate fit to the data if (i) the mean of the residual deviance was similar to the number of data points used in the model, (ii) at least 95% of means of standardized nodebased residuals were within ± 1.96 of the standard normal distribution, and (iii) Q Q plots of residuals lied closely around a line on visual inspection. SND, Standard Normal Distribution 6

Appendix Table G. Evaluation of model fit: Model restricted to trials with low bias risk Mean of residual N (%) of residuals Satisfactory Outcome N of Data Points deviance within ± 1.96 of SND Q-Q plot Target Vessel Revascularization 66 77 66 (100%) Yes Target Lesion Revascularization 66 76 66 (100%) Yes Death 68 61 67 (98.5%) Yes Myocardial Infarction 62 61 62 (100%) Yes Any Stent Thrombosis 64 51 63 (98.4%) Yes Definite Stent Thrombosis 58 41 57 (98.3%) Yes Definite or Probable Stent Thrombosis 68 47 68 (100%) Yes The model was considered to provide an adequate fit to the data if (i) the mean of the residual deviance was similar to the number of data points used in the model, (ii) at least 95% of means of standardized nodebased residuals were within ± 1.96 of the standard normal distribution, and (iii) Q Q plots of residuals lied closely around a line on visual inspection. SND, Standard Normal Distribution 7

Appendix Table H. Evaluation of model fit: Model restricted to trials with clopidogrel duration >6 months Mean of residual N (%) of residuals Satisfactory Outcome N of Data Points deviance within ± 1.96 of SND Q-Q plot Target Vessel Revascularization 64 73 64 (100%) Yes Target Lesion Revascularization 64 72 64 (100%) Yes Death 62 58 61 (98.4%) Yes Myocardial Infarction 62 64 62 (100%) Yes Any Stent Thrombosis 56 52 55 (98.2%) Yes Definite Stent Thrombosis 54 40 53 (98.2%) Yes Definite or Probable Stent Thrombosis 62 47 62 (100%) Yes The model was considered to provide an adequate fit to the data if (i) the mean of the residual deviance was similar to the number of data points used in the model, (ii) at least 95% of means of standardized nodebased residuals were within ± 1.96 of the standard normal distribution, and (iii) Q Q plots of residuals lied closely around a line on visual inspection. SND, Standard Normal Distribution 8