CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

推荐文献

Abstract

Recommended Article

A Combination of Allogeneic Stem Cells Promotes Cardiac Regeneration Heart Failure With Preserved, Borderline, and Reduced Ejection Fraction: 5-Year Outcomes Pulmonary Artery Pressure-Guided Management of Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure Association Between Living in Food Deserts and Cardiovascular Risk Burden of 30-Day Readmissions After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in 833,344 Patients in the United States: Predictors, Causes, and Cost Association of Body Mass Index With Lifetime Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and Compression of Morbidity Mode of Death in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
|<<... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ...>>|

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