CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

药物涂层球囊

科研文章

荐读文献

Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis With Drug-Eluting Balloons: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Long-term efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents for small coronary artery disease (BASKET-SMALL 2): 3-year follow-up of a randomised, non-inferiority trial 3-Year Clinical Follow-Up of the RIBS IV Clinical Trial A Prospective Randomized Study of Drug-Eluting Balloons Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis in Coronary Arteries Previously Treated With Drug-Eluting Stents Comparison of new-generation drug-eluting stents versus drug-coated balloon for in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons in In-Stent Restenosis: The RESTORE ISR China Randomized Trial Comparison of the safety and efficacy of two types of drug-eluting balloons (RESTORE DEB and SeQuent® Please) in the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RESTORE ISR China) Percutaneous coronary interventional strategies for treatment of in-stent restenosis: a network meta-analysis Survival After Coronary Revascularization With Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons Benefits with drug-coated balloon as compared to a conventional revascularization strategy for the treatment of coronary and non-coronary arterial disease: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 45 randomized trials Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients With Coronary Stent Restenosis

Clinical Trial2018 Feb 3;391(10119):431-440.

JOURNAL:Lancet. Article Link

A sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent (MiStent) versus an everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent (Xience) after percutaneous coronary intervention (DESSOLVE III): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial

de Winter RJ, Katagiri Y, Serruys PW et al. Keywords: sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent; everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent;non-inferiority

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDMiStent is a drug-eluting stent with a fully absorbable polymer coating containing and embedding a microcrystalline form of sirolimus into the vessel wall. It was developed to overcome the limitation of current durable polymer drug-eluting stents eluting amorphous sirolimus. The clinical effect of MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent compared with a durable polymer drug-eluting stents has not been investigated in a large randomised trial in an all-comer population.

METHODSWe did a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study (DESSOLVE III) at 20 hospitals in Germany, France, Netherlands, and Poland. Eligible participants were any patients aged at least 18 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in a lesion and had a reference vessel diameter of 2·50-3·75 mm. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to implantation of either a sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable polymer stent (MiStent) or an everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent (Xience). Randomisation was done by local investigators via web-based software with random blocks according to centre. The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority comparison of a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE)-cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation-between the groups at 12 months after the procedure assessed by intention-to-treat. A margin of 4·0% was defined for non-inferiority of the MiStent group compared with the Xience group. All participants were included in the safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02385279.

FINDINGSBetween March 20, and Dec 3, 2015, we randomly assigned 1398 patients with 2030 lesions; 703 patients with 1037 lesions were assigned to MiStent, of whom 697 received the index procedure, and 695 patients with 993 lesions were asssigned to Xience, of whom 690 received the index procedure. At 12 months, the primary endpoint had occurred in 40 patients (5·8%) in the sirolimus-eluting stent group and in 45 patients (6·5%) in the everolimus-eluting stent group (absolute difference -0·8% [95% CI -3·3 to 1·8], pnon-inferiority=0·0001). Procedural complications occurred in 12 patients (1·7%) in the sirolimus-eluting stent group and ten patients (1·4%) in the everolimus-eluting stent group; no clinical adverse events could be attributed to these dislodgements through a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. The rate of stent thrombosis, a safety indicator, did not differ between groups and was low in both treatment groups.

INTERPRETATIONThe sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer stent was non-inferior to the everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent for a device-oriented composite clinical endpoint at 12 months in an all-comer population. MiStent seems a reasonable alternative to other stents in clinical practice.

FUNDINGThe European Cardiovascular Research Institute, Micell Technologies (Durham, NC, USA), and Stentys (Paris, France).

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.