CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Can the Vanishing Stent Reappear? Fix the Technique, or Fix the Device? Screening for Cardiovascular Disease Risk With Electrocardiography: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention extent, complexity and platelet reactivity on outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation Comparison of a Novel Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent 5-Year Outcomes of the Randomized BIOFLOW-II Trial Defining Staged Procedures for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Trials A Guidance Document Mortality Differences Associated With Treatment Responses in CANTOS and FOURIER: Insights and Implications Predicting the 10-Year Risks of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Chinese Population: The China-PAR Project (Prediction for ASCVD Risk in China) Uptake of Drug-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Clinical Practice : An NCDR Registry to Practice Project
|<<... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...>>|

Clinical TrialMarch 2020 Vol 13, Issue 3

JOURNAL：Circulation. Article Link

Randomized Comparison of Everolimus- and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents With Biolimus-Eluting Stents in All-Comer Patients

YJ Youn, J-W Lee, J Yoon et al.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - There is limited data comparing the Xience everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with the BioMatrix biolimus-eluting stent (BES).


METHODS - This open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial enrolled all-comer patients to be randomly treated with either BES, EES, or ZES in a 1:1:1 ratio in 15 centers across South Korea. The primary end point was a device-oriented composite outcome consisting of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization at 24 months. The BES was compared with the EES and the ZES by intention-to-treat analyses with a noninferiority margin of 3.8%, respectively.


RESULTS - Because of slow recruitment and low event rates, this trial was prematurely terminated after enrollment of 1935 (75%) of the intended 2580 patients. Of the 1911 patients randomized to either EES (n=638), BES (n=634), or ZES (n =639), the rate of device-oriented composite outcome was 3.6%, 2.2%, and 3.9%, respectively, at 24 months (BES versus EES: absolute risk difference −1.4% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% CI: −3.2%]; Pfor noninferiority <0.001; BES versus ZES: absolute risk difference −1.7% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% CI: −3.6%]; Pfor noninferiority <0.001).


CONCLUSIONS - The BES was noninferior to either the EES or the ZES in all-comer patients for device-oriented composite outcome at the 24-month follow-up. However, caution is advised regarding interpretation of these results due to the premature termination of this study.


REGISTRATION - URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01397175.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top