Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent for Patients With Long Coronary Artery Disease

Abstract

Background— Outcomes remain relatively unfavorable for stent-based coronary intervention of lesions with long diseased segments. This study compared sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for long coronary lesions. Methods and Results— The present randomized, multicenter, prospective study compared the use of long (≥32 mm) SES with PES in 500 patients with long (≥25 mm) native coronary lesions. The primary end point of the trial was the rate of binary in-segment restenosis according to follow-up angiography at 6 months. The SES and PES groups had similar baseline characteristics. Lesion length was 33.9±11.6 mm in the SES group and 34.5±12.6 mm in the PES group ( P =0.527). The in-segment binary restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the PES group (3.3% versus 14.6%; relative risk 0.23; P <0.001). In-stent late loss of lumen diameter was 0.09±0.37 mm in the SES group and 0.45±0.55 mm in the PES group ( P <0.001). In patients with restenoses, a pattern of focal restenosis was more common in the SES group than in the PES group (100% versus 53.3%, P =0.031). Consequently, SES patients had a lower rate of target-lesion revascularization at 9 months (2.4% versus 7.2%, P =0.012). The incidence of death (0.8% in SES versus 0% in PES, P =0.499) or myocardial infarction (8.8% in SES versus 10.8% in PES, P =0.452) at 9 months of follow-up was not statistically different between the 2 groups. Conclusions— For patients with long native coronary artery disease, SES implantation was associated with a reduced incidence of angiographic restenosis and a reduced need for target-lesion revascularization compared with PES implantation.