Back

Effects of Statin Therapy in Patients Treated with Drug-Eluting and Drug-Coated Stents for Femoropopliteal Lesions: STAR-FP Study Outcomes

Takei, T.; Tokuda, T.; Yoshioka, N.; Ogata, K.; Tanaka, A.; Kojima, S.; Yamaguchi, K.; Yanagiuchi, T.; Nakama, T.

2024-09-07 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2024.09.06.24313216 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe effects of statins on drug-eluting stents (DESs) and drug-coated stents (DCSs) for femoropopliteal (FP) lesions are not well known. Therefore, this multicenter retrospective evaluated the impact of statins on DES and DCS patency. MethodsBetween January 2018 and December 2021, 449 patients were treated with DES and DCS at eight cardiovascular centers in Japan (LEADers FP registry). These lesions were divided into statin-treated and non-statin-treated arms. After propensity score matching, the effects of statins on DES and DCS were evaluated. The 2-year primary outcome measure was stent patency. The secondary outcomes included secondary patency, clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), limb salvage, major adverse limb events (MALE, CD-TLR+ major amputation), and a composite of overall survival and MALE or all-cause death at 2 years. ResultsAfter propensity score matching, the baseline and procedural characteristics did not differ significantly between the 135 patient pairs in the statin and non-statin groups. The primary patency at two years was significantly better in the statin group than in the non-statin group (86.9% vs. 75.1%, p=0.041). Regarding the secondary endpoints, the statin group demonstrated significantly superior secondary patency and freedom from MALE or all-cause mortality (95.5% vs. 87.0%, p=0.023 and 73.7% vs. 60.0%, p=0.012, respectively). ConclusionsThe results of this retrospective multicenter study demonstrated the superior primary patency in the statin group compared with the non-statin group at two years. These findings suggest that statins improve patency in patients undergoing DES and DCS.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.