MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Unselected Use of Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Coronary Revascularization.
Author: Yamaji K, Zanchin T, Zanchin C, Stortecky S, Koskinas KC, Hunziker L, Praz F, Blöchlinger S, Moro C, Moschovitis A, Seiler C, Valgimigli M, Billinger M, Pilgrim T, Heg D, Windecker S, Räber L.
Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Sep; 11(9):e006741. PubMed ID: 30354590.
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SESs) have been reported to be noninferior compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in a randomized clinical trial. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of an ultrathin strut BP-SES with a DP-EES in an all-comers population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 7640 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between March 2011 and June 2015, 4638 patients were exclusively treated with BP-SES (N=1896; 3137 lesions) or DP-EES (N=2742; 4468 lesions). After propensity score matching within strata of clinical indications, the final study population consisted of 2902 matched patients (BP-SES 2406 lesions and DP-EES 2368 lesions). The primary device-oriented composite end point (DOCE) included cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 1 year. BP-SES (6.9%) was noninferior to DP-EES (8.0%) with respect to device-oriented composite end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.65-1.11; P for noninferiority <0.001; P for superiority=0.24). No differences in cardiac death (BP-SES, 2.3% versus DP-EES, 3.0%; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.49-1.20; P=0.25), myocardial infarction (BP-SES, 4.6% versus DP-EES, 4.6%; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.71-1.40; P=0.99), or target lesion revascularization (BP-SES, 2.8% versus DP-EES, 2.5%; HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71-1.74; P=0.65) were observed. The rate of periprocedural myocardial infarction was comparable between the 2 groups (2.1% versus 2.2%; HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.59-1.58; P=0.89). The rate of definite stent thrombosis was similarly low throughout 1 year (BP-SES, 0.8% versus DP-EES, 0.8%; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.45-2.22; P=1.00). CONCLUSIONS: In a consecutively enrolled percutaneous coronary intervention population reflecting routine clinical practice, BP-SES was noninferior to DP-EES for device-oriented composite end point at 1 year. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02241291.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]