CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Randomized Comparison of Everolimus- and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents With Biolimus-Eluting Stents in All-Comer Patients 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology Variation in Revascularization Practice and Outcomes in Asymptomatic Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Novel functions of macrophages in the heart: insights into electrical conduction, stress, and diastolic dysfunction Effectiveness-Based Guidelines for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women—2011 Update: A Guideline From the American Heart Association Coronary flow velocity reserve predicts adverse prognosis in women with angina and noobstructive coronary artery disease: resultsfrom the iPOWER study PCI and CABG for Treating Stable Coronary Artery Disease Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of In-Hospital Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

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.