Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents

Author:

Iqbal Javaid1,Serruys Patrick W.1,Silber Sigmund1,Kelbaek Henning1,Richardt Gert1,Morel Marie-Angele1,Negoita Manuela1,Buszman Pawel E.1,Windecker Stephan1

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Interventional Cardiology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (J.I., P.W.S.); Department of Cardiovascular Science, University of Sheffield, UK (J.I.); International Centre for Circulatory Health, Imperial College London, London, UK (P.W.S.); Department of Cardiology, Heart Centre at the Isar, Munich, Germany (S.S.); Righshospitalet, The Heart Center, Copenhagen, Denmark (H.K.); Herzzentrum der Segeberger Kliniken, Bad Segeberg, Germany (G.R.); Cardialysis BV,...

Abstract

Background— Newer-generation drug-eluting stents that release zotarolimus or everolimus have been shown to be superior to the first-generation drug-eluting stents. However, data comparing long-term safety and efficacy of zotarolimus- (ZES) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) are limited. RESOLUTE all-comers (Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial compared these 2 stents and has shown that ZES was noninferior to EES at 12-month for the primary end point of target lesion failure. We report the secondary clinical outcomes at the final 5-year follow-up of this trial. Methods and Results— RESOLUTE all-comer clinical study is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, 2-arm, open-label, noninferiority trial with minimal exclusion criteria. Patients (n=2292) were randomly assigned to treatment with either ZES (n=1140) or EES (n=1152). Patient-oriented composite end point (combination of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and any revascularizations), device-oriented composite end point (combination of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization), and major adverse cardiac events (combination of all-cause death, all myocardial infarction, emergent coronary bypass surgery, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization) were analyzed at 5-year follow-up. The 2 groups were well-matched at baseline. Five-year follow-up data were available for 98% patients. There were no differences in patient-oriented composite end point (ZES 35.3% versus EES 32.0%, P =0.11), device-oriented composite end point (ZES 17.0% versus EES 16.2%, P =0.61), major adverse cardiac events (ZES 21.9% versus EES 21.6%, P =0.88), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (ZES 2.8% versus EES 1.8%, P =0.12). Conclusions— At 5-year follow-up, ZES and EES had similar efficacy and safety in a population of patients who had minimal exclusion criteria. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00617084.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3