Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 24, 2025
A Murine Model of Stent Implantation in the Carotid Artery for the Study of Restenosis
Published on: May 14, 2013
Clinical efficacy of drug-eluting coronary stents based on real-world data
Weilian Peng1, Qifeng Yi2, Shuqing Shi3
1Department of Assets and Equipment, Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410013.
Insights
This study compared four drug-eluting coronary stents, finding no significant differences in safety or effectiveness across most conditions. Domestic stents B and C offered better economic value, suggesting increased use of domestic options to reduce patient costs.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Medical Device Evaluation
- Health Economics
Background:
- Coronary stents are critical for treating cardiovascular diseases, influencing clinical outcomes and healthcare costs.
- Current selection of coronary stents lacks a standardized evaluation method, relying on patient and physician factors.
- Drug-eluting stents are widely used, necessitating comparative analysis of available options.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate and compare the safety, effectiveness, and economic aspects of different drug-eluting coronary stents.
- To provide data-driven insights for optimizing coronary stent selection in clinical practice.
- To assess the cost-effectiveness of domestic versus imported coronary stent options.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 4 drug-eluting coronary stent types (3 domestic, 1 imported) from January 2018 to December 2019.
- Patient subgroups based on disease severity: angina pectoris, acute myocardial infarction, and ischemic heart disease.
- Comparison of safety (mortality, complications, infection), efficacy (31-day return, 365-day MI, restenosis, reintervention, thrombosis), and economy (total and stent costs).
Main Results:
- No significant differences in safety outcomes were observed among the four stent types (P>0.05).
- Effectiveness was comparable across most disease types, with no significant differences noted except in acute myocardial infarction patients.
- Domestic stents B and C demonstrated superior economic performance compared to domestic stent A and the imported stent (all P<0.05).
Conclusions:
- Hospitals can consider increasing the proportion of domestic coronary stents in their inventory and management strategies.
- This approach can enhance product localization and reduce the financial burden on patients by lowering stent costs.
- The findings support a more informed and cost-conscious selection of coronary stents in clinical settings.
Objectives:
As the main implant material, coronary stent is one of the main factors that affect clinical treatment outcome and patient cost. The choice for coronary stent in clinic depends on multiply factors including patient preference, medical personnel expertise and current technology, and no recognized method has been established for the evaluation and choice of coronary stent. In this study, we aim to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and economy of a few drug-eluting coronary stents in clinic.
Methods:
A retrospective analysis was employed to study the cases treated by drug-eluting stent intervention in a third grade hospital from January 2018 to December 2019. Based on the specific products, these cases were assigned into a domestic stent A group, a domestic stent B group, a domestic stent C group, and an imported stent group. According to the severity of the disease, they were divided into an angina pectoris, an acute myocardial infarction, and an ischemic heart disease subgroups. Layer analysis was carried out for inter-subgroup comparisons in terms of safety (indicated by mortality rate, complication rate, and infection rate), efficacy (indicated by 31-day return rate, 365-day myocardial infarction rate, restenosis rate, secondary intervention rate, and thrombosis rate), and economy (indicated by averaged total cost and coronary stent cost).
Results:
Among the 4 products, there was no difference in safety (P>0.05). Except for patients with acute myocardial infarction, there was no significant difference in the effectiveness of the 4 products for the other 2 diseases. The economical aspect of the domestic stent B and the domestic stent C was better than that of the domestic stent A and the imported stent (all P<0.05).
Conclusions:
With all the indicators of these 4 stents taken into consideration, we conclude that hospitals may appropriately increase the share of domestic coronary stent in product selection and in-hospital management. This measure helps increase product localization rate and ease the financial burden for patients by reducing coronary stent cost.
More Related Videos
05:04Implantation of Human-Sized Coronary Stents into Rat Abdominal Aorta Using a Trans-Femoral Access
Published on: November 19, 2020
06:39Novel Percutaneous Approach for Deployment of 3D Printed Coronary Stenosis Implants in Swine Models of Ischemic Heart Disease
Published on: February 18, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:30Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
01:27Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
01:20Drug Product Performance: In Vitro–In Vivo Correlation