CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Intravascular ultrasound in the evaluation and treatment of left main coronary artery disease: a consensus statement from the European Bifurcation Club Incidence and Management of Restenosis After Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Disease With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents (from Failure in Left Main Study With 2nd Generation Stents-Cardiogroup III Study) Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence Access Site and Outcomes for Unprotected Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database Impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: an analysis from the EXCEL trial Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Optimal Stent Strategy in Left Main Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. The PRECOMBAT-2 (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) study

Clinical Trial2020 May 14. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Safety and efficacy of the bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in high-risk patients undergoing PCI: TWILIGHT-SYNERGY

U Baber, R Chandiramani, R Mehran et al. Keywords: stent comparation; DES; bioabsorbable; durable polymer; high-risk patients

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Data examining the safety and efficacy of the bioabsorbable polymer (BP) drugeluting stent (DES) as compared with durable polymer (DP) DES in highrisk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain limited.

 

METHODS - We conducted a prespecified analysis among patients enrolled in the TWILIGHT trial treated with the SYNERGY BPDES or a DPDES. Following successful PCI and 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were randomized to aspirin or placebo for 1 year; DES choice was at physician discretion. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) [composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST)].

 

RESULTS - Among enrolled participants (N = 9006), 653 were treated exclusively with the SYNERGY BPDES and 6404 with a comparator DPDES. Over 15 months, TLF rates were 6.4% and 6.1% among those receiving a SYNERGY BPDES and a DPDES, respectively (adjusted HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.64 1.35; p = 0.72). The effect of ticagrelor monotherapy on Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding and the composite of allcause death, MI or stroke was uniform across DES groups (both pint >0.10).

 

CONCLUSIONS - The safety and efficacy profile of the SYNERGY BPDES is comparable to that of contemporary DPDES in highrisk patients undergoing PCI. Compared to ticagrelor plus aspirin, the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy is consistent among patients receiving SYNERGY BPDES or DPDES.

 

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.