CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

2016 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update on New Pharmacological Therapy for Heart Failure: An Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Failure Novel functions of macrophages in the heart: insights into electrical conduction, stress, and diastolic dysfunction Treatment of higher-risk patients with an indication for revascularization: evolution within the field of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention Dynamic atrioventricular delay programming improves ventricular electrical synchronization as evaluated by 3D vectorcardiography Overall and Cause-Specific Mortality in Randomized Clinical Trials Comparing Percutaneous Interventions With Coronary Bypass Surgery: A Meta-analysis Randomized Comparison of Ridaforolimus-Eluting and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents 2-Year Clinical Outcomes: From the BIONICS and NIREUS Trials Individualizing Revascularization Strategy for Diabetic Patients With Multivessel Coronary Disease ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: A Report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography A Randomized Trial Comparing the NeoVas Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold and Metallic Everolimus-Eluting Stents A randomized multicentre trial to compare revascularization with optimal medical therapy for the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions

Original ResearchAugust 2019 Vol 12, Issue 8

JOURNAL:Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Long-Term Effect of Ultrathin-Strut Versus Thin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Randomized Trial

JF Iglesias, D Heg , M Roffi et al.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Randomized trials evaluating the Orsiro biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES; 60 and 80 μm strut thickness for stent diameters 3 and >3 mm, respectively) did not stratify according to vessel size and failed to specify the impact of ultrathin-strut thickness on long-term clinical outcomes compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES). We sought to assess the long-term effect of ultrathin-strut (60 μm) BP-SES versus thin-strut (81 μm) DP-EES on long-term outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization for small vessel disease.

 

METHODS - In a subgroup analysis of the randomized, multicenter, noninferiority BIOSCIENCE trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome randomly assigned to treatment with BP-SES or DP-EES were stratified according to vessel size (3 mm versus >3 mm) as a surrogate to compare patients treated with ultrathin-strut versus thin-strut drug-eluting stent. The primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, within 5 years.

 

RESULTS - Among 2109 patients, 1234 (59%) were treated for small vessel disease. At 5 years, target lesion failure occurred in 124 patients (cumulative incidence, 22.3%) treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES and 109 patients (18.3%) treated with thin-strut DP-EES (rate ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.941.58; P=0.13). Cumulative incidences of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization and definite stent thrombosis at 5 years were similar in patients treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES and thin-strut DP-EES. After adjustment for potential confounders, there was no significant interaction between vessel size and treatment effect of BP-SES versus DP-EES.

 

CONCLUSIONS - We found no significant difference in clinical outcomes throughout 5 years between patients with small vessel disease treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES versus thin-strut DP-EES.

 

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION - URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.