Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Polymer-free and biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents show comparable outcomes in PCI

Polymer-free and biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents show comparable outcomes in PCI
Photo by Logan Voss / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Consider PF-DES and BP-DES as comparable options for PCI based on current evidence, but await further long-term data.

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated polymer-free drug-eluting stents (PF-DES) versus biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The analysis included a large cohort of patients and assessed several clinical outcomes.

The meta-analysis found no statistically significant differences between PF-DES and BP-DES for cardiac death, target lesion failure, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel revascularization. The authors observed that the two stent types had comparable safety and efficacy profiles.

The authors note that further randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and newer-generation stent models. This limitation highlights the need for additional data to confirm these findings over extended follow-up periods.

Clinically, these results suggest that PF-DES and BP-DES may be considered equivalent options for patients undergoing PCI, with no clear advantage of one over the other based on current evidence. However, clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously given the call for more research.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 954
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedJun 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) are currently used in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Polymer-free drug-eluting stents (PF-DES) have the potential to mitigate any risk associated with BP-DES; however, the relative efficacy and safety of these interventions remain to be fully elucidated. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central was performed from inception to January 2025 to identify randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing PF-DES with BP-DES in patients undergoing PCI. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I ² statistic. A two-sided P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted based on follow-up duration. RESULTS: A total of seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four observational studies comprising 11 954 patients were included, of whom 5947 (49.7%) received PF-DES. In the pooled analysis, no statistically significant differences were observed between PF-DES and BP-DES in terms of cardiac death [risk ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96-1.31, P  = 0.15], target lesion failure (risk ratio: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.81-1.46, P  = 0.58), stent thrombosis (risk ratio: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.58-1.41, P  = 0.64), target lesion revascularization (risk ratio: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.81-2.02, P  = 0.28), or target vessel revascularization (risk ratio: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.70-1.58, P  = 0.79). Likewise, no significant subgroup effect was observed regarding longer-term follow-up outcomes. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found comparable safety and efficacy outcomes between PF-DES and BP-DES in patients undergoing PCI; however, further RCTs are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and newer-generation stent models.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.