CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Impact of lesion complexity on peri-procedural adverse events and the benefit of potent intravenous platelet adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibition after percutaneous coronary intervention: core laboratory analysis from 10 854 patients from the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial Contemporary use of drug-coated balloons in coronary artery disease: Where are we now? The performance of non-invasive tests to rule-in and rule-out significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable angina: a meta-analysis focused on post-test disease probability A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Interventional Cardiology: From Decision-Making Aid to Advanced Interventional Procedure Assistance The Year in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020: Coronary Intervention Treating Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Why, How, and When? Comparison of Heart Team vs Interventional Cardiologist Recommendations for the Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Cardiovascular Risk Reduction with Icosapent Ethyl for Hypertriglyceridemia Rotational atherectomy and new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation

Original Research2013 Mar 1;111(5):676-83.

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Comparison of paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus) and everolimus-eluting stents (Xience) in left main coronary artery disease with 3 years follow-up (from the ESTROFA-LM registry)

De la Torre Hernandez JM, Alfonso F, ESTROFA-LM Study Group. Keywords: IVUS guided PCI; left main coronary artery; PES; EES; outcome

ABSTRACT


Evidence regarding therapy with drug-eluting stents in the left main coronary artery (LM) is based mostly on trials performed with first-generation drug-eluting stents. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes after treatment for unprotected LM disease with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES). The ESTROFA-LM is a multicenter retrospective registry including consecutive patients with unprotected LM disease treated with PES or EES. A total of 770 patients have been included at 21 centers, 415 with treated PES and 355 with EES. Treatment with 2 stents was more frequent with PES (17% vs 10.4%, p = 0.007), whereas intravascular ultrasound was more frequently used with EES (35.2% vs 26%, p = 0.006). The 3-year death and infarction survival rates were 86.1% for PES and 87.3% for EES (p = 0.50) and for death, infarction, and target lesion revascularization were 83.6% versus 82% (p = 0.60), respectively. Definite or probable thrombosis was 1.6% for PES and 1.4% for EES (p = 0.80). The use of 2 stents, age, diabetes, and acute coronary syndromes were independent predictors of mortality. In the subgroup of distal lesions, the use of intravascular ultrasound was an independent predictor of better outcome. Comparison of propensity score-matched groups did not yield differences between the 2 stents. In conclusion, the results of this multicenter registry show comparable safety and efficacy at 3 years for PES and EES in the treatment of LM disease. The use of bifurcation stenting techniques in distal lesions was a relevant independent predictor for events. The use of intravascular ultrasound appears to have a positive impact on patients treated for LM distal disease.