Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the long‐term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease. Specifically, we compared clinical endpoints of patients who received sirolimus‐eluting stents (SES) versus bare‐metal stents (BMS) for SVG disease. Background: A recent small randomized‐controlled trial (RCT) reported increased mortality with the use of SES in SVG disease. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients who underwent SES placement for a SVG lesion(s) at our institutions over a 4‐year period. The procedural and medical records were reviewed to identify predetermined clinical outcomes. Results: 318 patients who underwent SES placement for a SVG lesion were identified. 7 patients were lost to follow‐up. 141/311 patients (45%) received SES, while 170/311 (55%) received BMS. At a mean follow‐up of 34 months, there was a reduction in target lesion revascularization (TLR) (7% vs. 14%, P = 0.07) without an increased risk of mortality (6% vs. 12%, P = 0.06) in patients who received SES compared to patients who received BMS. When compared to the recent RCT's SES patients at long‐term follow‐up, our SES patients had significantly less mortality; rates of myocardial infarction, TLR, target vessel revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events; and were more likely to be taking dual antiplatelet and statin medications. Conclusion: Our results support that SES used in SVG lesions result in a reduction in TLR without an increased risk of mortality, and therefore may be an equally safe and feasible technique for revascularization with excellent long‐term clinical outcomes. These patients may benefit from prolonged dual antiplatelet and statin medication regimens. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.