CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

推荐文献

Abstract

Recommended Article

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Readmissions Where Are the Solutions? 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society Long-Term Outcomes of Biodegradable Versus Second-Generation Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent Implantations for Myocardial Infarction Derivation and Validation of a Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion Intervention Procedural Success Score From the 20,000-Patient EuroCTO Registry:The EuroCTO (CASTLE) Score Discharge Against Medical Advice After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States Major infections after bypass surgery and stenting for multivessel coronary disease in the randomised SYNTAX trial Development and validation of a simple risk score to predict 30-day readmission after percutaneous coronary intervention in a cohort of medicare patients Large-Bore Radial Access for Complex PCI: A Flash of COLOR With Some Shades of Grey

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.