Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Efficacy and safety of TiNO-coated stents versus drug-eluting coronary stents. Systematic literature review and meta-analysis

View ORCID ProfileFrederic C. Daoud, Louis Létinier, Nicholas Moore, View ORCID ProfilePierre Coste, View ORCID ProfilePasi P. Karjalainen
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.19.20248564
Frederic C. Daoud
aUniv. Bordeaux, INSERM, BPH, U1219, F-33000, Bordeaux, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frederic C. Daoud
  • For correspondence: frederic.daoud-pineau@u-bordeaux.fr
Louis Létinier
aUniv. Bordeaux, INSERM, BPH, U1219, F-33000, Bordeaux, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicholas Moore
aUniv. Bordeaux, INSERM, BPH, U1219, F-33000, Bordeaux, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pierre Coste
bCoronary Care Unit, Cardiologic Hospital, University of Bordeaux, Pessac, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Pierre Coste
Pasi P. Karjalainen
cCardiac unit, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital and Helsinki University, Helsinki, Finland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Pasi P. Karjalainen
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives To compare clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using titanium-nitride-oxide coated stents (TiNOS) versus drug-eluting stents (DES) in coronary artery disease (CAD) including acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Design Prospective systematic literature (SLR) conducted according to PRISMA. Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science were searched in March 2018 and updated.

Setting Interventional cardiology.

Participants Patients with CAD, including ACS, requiring PCI.

Interventions All prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared clinical outcomes after PCI with DES versus TiNOS.

Outcome measures The pooled risk ratios (RR), TiNOS over DES, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are computed for device-oriented Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE), non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death (CD), clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR), probable or definite stent thrombosis (ST), total mortality, at one to five years after PCI. Pooled RRs are stratified according to baseline ACS versus other CAD. Sensitivity analysis (SA) and certainty of the evidence are rated per GRADE.

Results Five RCTs are eligible with 1,855 patients with TiNOS versus 1,363 with DES at 1-year follow-up and 783 versus 771 at 5-year. Three RCTs included patients with ACS only. One-year RRs in ACS are: MACE 0.93 [0.72, 1.20], MI 0.48 [0.31, 0.73], CD 0.66 [0.33, 1.31], TLR 1.55 [1.10, 2.19] and ST 0.35 [0.20, 0.64]. One-year MACE, MI, and ST are robust to SA. The certainty of the evidence is high in MACE, moderate in MI, and low or very low in the other endpoints. There are too few observations to conclude about other CAD and 5-year outcomes. However, 5-year interim results are consistent with 1-year conclusions.

Conclusions A similar risk of MACE is found in TiNOS and DES, with potentially fewer MI and ST but more TLR in TiNOS. TiNOS are safe and effective in ACS at 1-year follow-up.

Registration PROSPERO CRD42018090622

Strengths and limitations of this study

  • - Strengths:

    • The level of certainty of the evidence is high for the primary endpoint at one-year follow-up in patients treated for acute coronary syndrome.

    • The primary endpoint and critical secondary endpoints are robust to sensitivity analysis.

  • - Limitations:

    • Outcomes in patients treated for chronic coronary artery disease cannot be analyzed.

    • The level of certainty of the evidence of secondary endpoints is moderate or low.

    • Analysis of five-year outcomes is still at an interim stage.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Clinical Trial

Not a clinical trial

Funding Statement

No external funding was received.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

No IRB or regulatory requirement for a systematic literature review of published material.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • 1) Made additional formal changes to group effectiveness endpoints and safety endpoints in two sections, each with a compiled image file.

Data Availability

This work used published summary data only.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted January 30, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Efficacy and safety of TiNO-coated stents versus drug-eluting coronary stents. Systematic literature review and meta-analysis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Efficacy and safety of TiNO-coated stents versus drug-eluting coronary stents. Systematic literature review and meta-analysis
Frederic C. Daoud, Louis Létinier, Nicholas Moore, Pierre Coste, Pasi P. Karjalainen
medRxiv 2020.12.19.20248564; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.19.20248564
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Efficacy and safety of TiNO-coated stents versus drug-eluting coronary stents. Systematic literature review and meta-analysis
Frederic C. Daoud, Louis Létinier, Nicholas Moore, Pierre Coste, Pasi P. Karjalainen
medRxiv 2020.12.19.20248564; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.19.20248564

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Cardiovascular Medicine
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (163)
  • Allergy and Immunology (416)
  • Anesthesia (92)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (865)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (159)
  • Dermatology (98)
  • Emergency Medicine (251)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (397)
  • Epidemiology (8585)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (390)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1765)
  • Geriatric Medicine (168)
  • Health Economics (373)
  • Health Informatics (1250)
  • Health Policy (624)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (470)
  • Hematology (197)
  • HIV/AIDS (378)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10331)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (553)
  • Medical Education (192)
  • Medical Ethics (51)
  • Nephrology (214)
  • Neurology (1691)
  • Nursing (97)
  • Nutrition (252)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (328)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (451)
  • Oncology (930)
  • Ophthalmology (264)
  • Orthopedics (102)
  • Otolaryngology (172)
  • Pain Medicine (114)
  • Palliative Medicine (40)
  • Pathology (254)
  • Pediatrics (538)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (255)
  • Primary Care Research (209)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1782)
  • Public and Global Health (3862)
  • Radiology and Imaging (626)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (322)
  • Respiratory Medicine (522)
  • Rheumatology (208)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (170)
  • Sports Medicine (158)
  • Surgery (191)
  • Toxicology (36)
  • Transplantation (101)
  • Urology (76)