Ultrathin-strut vs thin-strut drug-eluting stents for multi and single-stent lesions: A lesion-level subgroup analysis of 2 randomized trials.

Détails

Ressource 1Télécharger: 37192697.pdf (1663.99 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: CC BY 4.0
ID Serval
serval:BIB_BB6D35CD542C
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
Ultrathin-strut vs thin-strut drug-eluting stents for multi and single-stent lesions: A lesion-level subgroup analysis of 2 randomized trials.
Périodique
American heart journal
Auteur⸱e⸱s
Häner J.D., Rohla M., Losdat S., Iglesias J.F., Muller O., Eeckhout E., Kurz D., Weilenmann D., Kaiser C., Tapponnier M., Roffi M., Heg D., Windecker S., Pilgrim T.
ISSN
1097-6744 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0002-8703
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
09/2023
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
263
Pages
73-84
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Publication Status: ppublish
Résumé
Whether ultrathin-strut stents are particularly beneficial for lesions requiring implantation of more than 1 stent is unknown.
In a post-hoc lesion-level analysis of 2 randomized trials comparing ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer Sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) vs thin-strut durable polymer Everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES), lesions were stratified into multistent lesions (MSL) vs single-stent lesions (SSL). The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of lesion-related unclear/cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or revascularization, at 24 months.
Among 5328 lesions in 3397 patients, 1492 (28%) were MSL (722 with BP-SES, 770 with DP-EES). At 2 years, TLF occurred in 63 lesions (8.9%) treated with BP-SES and 60 lesions (7.9%) treated with DP-EES in the MSL-group (subdistibution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.13; 95% CI, 0.77-1.64; P = .53), and in 121 (6.4%) and 136 (7.4%) lesions treated with BP-SES and DP-EES respectively (SHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.62-1.18; P = .35) in the SSL-group (P for interaction = .241). While the rates of lesion-related MI or revascularization were significantly lower in SSL treated with BP-SES as compared to DP-EES (3.5% vs 5.2%; SHR, 0.67; 95% CI 0.46-0.97; P = .036), no significant difference was observed in MSL (7.1% vs 5.4%; SHR, 1.31; 95% CI 0.85-2.03; P = .216) with significant interaction between groups (P for interaction = .014).
Rates of TLF are similar between ultrathin-strut BP-SES and thin-strut DP-EES in MSL and SSL. The use of ultrathin-strut BP-SES vs thin-strut DP-EES did not prove to be particularly beneficial for the treatment of multistent lesions.
Post-hoc analysis from the BIOSCIENCE (NCT01443104) and BIOSTEMI (NCT02579031) trials.
Mots-clé
Humans, Absorbable Implants, Coronary Artery Disease/surgery, Drug-Eluting Stents, Everolimus/pharmacology, Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Polymers, Prosthesis Design, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Sirolimus, Treatment Outcome
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
23/05/2023 14:23
Dernière modification de la notice
13/12/2023 8:23
Données d'usage