Five-year outcomes from a trial of three limus-eluting stents with different polymer coatings in patients with coronary artery disease: Final results from the ISAR-TEST 4 randomised trial
Kufner S, Byrne RA, Valeskini M, Schulz S, Ibrahim T, Hoppmann P, Schneider S, Laugwitz KL, Schunkert H, Kastrati A (2016)
Publication Type: Journal article
Publication year: 2016
Journal
Book Volume: 11
Pages Range: 1372-1379
Journal Issue: 12
DOI: 10.4244/eijy14m11_02
Abstract
Aims: Both biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stents offer potential for enhanced late outcomes in comparison with earlier-generation permanent polymer sirolimus-eluting stents. However, long-Term comparative efficacy data among these devices remain a scientific gap. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (Yukon Choice PC) versus permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stents (XIENCE) versus permanent polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (CYPHER) at five-year follow-up. Methods and results: Overall, 2,603 patients were randomised to treatment with the Yukon Choice PC (n=1,299), XIENCE (n=652) or CYPHER (n=652) stents. The primary endpoint was the device-oriented composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularisation (TLR). The main secondary endpoint was definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). Follow-up was performed up to five years. Concerning the primary endpoint, there was no significant difference between Yukon Choice PC and XIENCE stents (20.5% vs. 19.5%, HR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.84-1.29; p=0.71) or between CYPHER and XIENCE stents (23.5% vs. 19.5%, HR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.95-1.53; p=0.12). In terms of safety, rates of ST were similar with both Yukon Choice PC and XIENCE (1.2% vs. 1.4%; HR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.37-1.91; p=0.67) but numerically higher with CYPHER as compared to XIENCE (2.4% vs. 1.4%, HR=1.67, 95% CI: 0.73-3.82; p=0.22). Conclusions: Biodegradable polymer Yukon Choice PC and permanent polymer XIENCE stents showed comparable clinical outcomes at five years. Permanent polymer CYPHER stents showed numerically higher rates of device-related adverse events. Trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT00598676).
Involved external institutions
Germany (DE)How to cite
APA:
Kufner, S., Byrne, R.A., Valeskini, M., Schulz, S., Ibrahim, T., Hoppmann, P.,... Kastrati, A. (2016). Five-year outcomes from a trial of three limus-eluting stents with different polymer coatings in patients with coronary artery disease: Final results from the ISAR-TEST 4 randomised trial. EuroIntervention, 11(12), 1372-1379. https://doi.org/10.4244/eijy14m11_02
MLA:
Kufner, Sebastian, et al. "Five-year outcomes from a trial of three limus-eluting stents with different polymer coatings in patients with coronary artery disease: Final results from the ISAR-TEST 4 randomised trial." EuroIntervention 11.12 (2016): 1372-1379.
BibTeX: Download