There are limited head-to-head randomized data on patient-related versus stent-related outcomes for everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES).
In the SORT OUT IV (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV) trial, comparing the EES with the SES in patients with coronary artery disease, the EES was noninferior to the SES at 9 months.
The primary endpoint was a composite: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization. Safety and efficacy outcomes at 2 years were further assessed with specific focus on patient-related composite (all death, all MI, or any revascularization) and stent-related composite outcomes (cardiac death, target vessel MI, or symptom-driven target lesion revascularization). A total of 1,390 patients were assigned to receive the EES, and 1,384 patients were assigned to receive the SES.
At 2 years, the composite primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in the EES group and in 8.7% in the SES group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.22). The patient-related outcome: 15.0% in the EES group versus 15.6% in the SES group, (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.15), and the stent-related outcome: 5.2% in the EES group versus 5.3% in the SES group (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.35) did not differ between groups. Rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower in the EES group (0.2% vs. 0.9%, (HR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.80).
At 2-year follow-up, the EES was found to be noninferior to the SES with regard to both patient-related and stent-related clinical outcomes.
We aimed to compare angiographic and clinical outcomes after the implantation of everolimus-eluting (EES) and sirolimus-eluting (SES) stents in patients with diabetes.
There are limited data on long-term outcome after EES vs SES implantation in diabetic patients.
We randomized 213 patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease to EES (n?=?108) or SES (n?=?105) implantation. Angiographic follow-up was performed 10 months after the index procedure and all patients were followed clinically for 4 years. The primary endpoint was angiographic in-stent late luminal loss at 10-month follow-up. Secondary endpoints included angiographic restenosis rate, the need for target lesion revascularization (TLR) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE; defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or TLR) at 4-year follow-up.
At 10-month angiographic follow-up, in-stent late lumen loss was 0.20?±?0.53 mm and 0.11?±?0.49 mm (P?=?0.28), and angiographic restenosis rate was 3.8% and 5.2% (P?=?0.72) in the EES and SES groups, respectively. At 4-year clinical follow-up, MACE had occurred in 22 (20.4%) patients in the EES group and 25 (23.8%) patients in SES group (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.47-1.49; P?=?0.55), with TLR performed in 6 (5.6%) and 10 (9.5%) patients in the two groups (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.21-1-58; P?=?0.28).
EES and SES had comparable 10-month angiographic and 4-year clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease.
Diabetes is associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) after percutaneous coronary intervention. The purpose of this substudy of the SORT OUT IV trial was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with and without diabetes mellitus treated with everolimus-eluting stents (EESs) or sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs). In total 2,774 patients (390 with diabetes, 14.1%) were randomized to stent implantation with EESs (n = 1,390, diabetes in 14.0%) or SESs (n = 1,384, diabetes in 14.2%). Randomization was stratified by presence/absence of diabetes. The primary end point was MACEs, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization within 18 months. MACEs were higher in diabetic than in nondiabetic patients (13.1% vs 6.4%, hazard ratio [HR] 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.51 to 2.86). In diabetic patients, MACEs were seen in 10.3% of those treated with EESs and in 15.8% of those treated with SESs (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.11). In nondiabetic patients, MACEs occurred in 6.6% of EES-treated and in 6.3% SES-treated patients (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.46). In diabetics, cardiac death occurred in 3.1% of EES-treated and in 4.6% of SES-treated patients (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.89), myocardial infarction occurred in 0.5% of EES-treated and in 3.6% of SES-treated patients (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.16), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization was needed in 3.1% of EES-treated and in 7.7% of SES-treated patients (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.02). No interaction between diabetes status and type of drug-eluting stent was found for the end points. In conclusion, patients with diabetes have higher MACE rates than nondiabetics. No significant differences in safety or efficacy outcomes after EES or SES implantation were present in nondiabetic or diabetic patients.
Comparison of outcomes of patients = 80 years of age having percutaneous coronary intervention according to presentation (stable vs unstable angina pectoris/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction vs ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction).
Patients = 80 years old with coronary artery disease constitute a particular risk group in relation to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). From 2002 through 2008 we examined the annual proportion of patients = 80 years old undergoing PCI in western Denmark, their indications for PCI, and prognosis. From 2002 through 2009 all elderly patients treated with PCI were identified in a population of 3.0 million based on the Western Denmark Heart Registry. Cox regression analysis was used to compare mortality rates according to clinical indications controlling for potential confounding. In total 3,792 elderly patients (= 80 years old) were treated with PCI and the annual proportion increased from 224 (5.4%) in 2002 to 588 (10.2%) in 2009. The clinical indication was stable angina pectoris (SAP) in 30.2%, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in 35.0%, UAP/non-STEMI in 29.7%, and "ventricular arrhythmia or congestive heart failure" in 5.1%. Overall 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 9.2% and 18.1%, respectively. Compared to patients with SAP the adjusted 1-year mortality risk was significantly higher for patients presenting with STEMI (hazard ratio 3.86, 95% confidence interval 3.08 to 4.85), UAP/non-STEMI (hazard ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 2.50), and ventricular arrhythmia or congestive heart failure (hazard ratio 2.75, 95% confidence interval 1.92 to 3.92). In patients with SAP target vessel revascularization decreased from 7.1% in 2002 to 2.5% in 2008. In conclusion, the proportion of patients = 80 years old treated with PCI increased significantly over an 8-year period. Patients with SAP had the lowest mortality rates and rates of clinically driven target vessel revascularization decreased over time.
We evaluated the effectiveness and safety of a zotarolimus-eluting (ZES) versus a sirolimus-eluting (SES) coronary stent in a large cohort of patients treated with one of these stents in Western Denmark.
A total of 6,122 patients treated with ZES (n=2,282) or SES (n=3,840) were followed for up to 27 months. We ascertained clinical outcomes based on national medical databases.
Incidence of target lesion revascularization (no. per 100 person-years) was 5.3 in the ZES group compared to 1.9 in the SES group (adjusted hazard ratio (HR)=2.19, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.39-3.47; p=0.001). All-cause mortality was also higher in the ZES group (ZES: 6.3; SES: 3.3; adjusted HR=1.34, 95% CI: 1.05-1.72; p=0.02), while stent thrombosis (ZES: 1.2; SES: 0.5; adjusted HR=1.98, 95% CI: 0.75-5.23; p=0.14) did not differ significantly.
In agreement with previously published randomised data, this observational study indicated that the ZES was associated with an increased risk of death and TLR in a large cohort of consecutive patients.
Cites: Heart. 2009 Dec;95(23):1907-1219535352
Cites: Am J Cardiol. 2009 Nov 15;104(10):1370-619892052
Cites: Am J Cardiol. 2010 Jun 1;105(11):1513-920494654
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 8;363(2):136-4620554978
Cites: J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Oct 5;56(15):1187-9520883925
Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have a worse outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than nondiabetic patients. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and death in diabetic and nondiabetic patients treated with primary PCI for ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) in Western Denmark. From January 2002 through June 2005, 3,655 consecutive patients with STEMI treated with primary PCI and stent implantation (316 patients with DM, 8.6%; 3,339 patients without DM, 91.4%) were recorded in the Western Denmark Heart Registry. All patients were followed for 3 years. Cox regression analysis was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs), controlling for potential confounding. Three-year rates of definite stent thrombosis were 1.6% in the DM group and 1.5% in the non-DM group (adjusted HR 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50 to 2.67). The rate of MI was 12.3% in the DM group versus 5.6% in the non-DM group (adjusted HR 2.56, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.61). Rates of TLR were 12.1% in the DM group and 8.7% in the non-DM group (adjusted HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.11). All-cause mortality was 23.7% in patients with DM versus 12.7% in patients without DM (adjusted HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.59). In conclusion, stent thrombosis rate was similar in patients with and without DM and STEMI treated with primary PCI, whereas the presence of DM increased the risk of MI, TLR, and death.
Randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent with a biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and study design of the Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome VII trial.
Third-generation coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) with biodegradable polymers have been designed to improve safety and efficacy. We designed a large scale registry-based randomized clinical trial to compare 2 third-generation DES: a thin strut, cobalt-chromium DES with silicon carbide-coating releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer (O-SES, Orsiro; Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland) with the stainless steel biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stents (N-BES, Nobori; Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) in an all-comer patient population.
The multicenter SORT OUT VII trial (NCT01879358) randomly assigned 2,530 patients to treatment with biodegradable polymer O-SES or biodegradable polymer N-BES at 3 sites in Western Denmark. Patients were eligible, if they were =18 years old; had chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes; and =1 coronary lesion with >50% diameter stenosis, requiring treatment with a DES. The primary end point target lesion failure is a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Clinically, driven event detection based on Danish registries will be used. An event rate of 6.5% is assumed in each stent group. With a sample size of 1,157 patients in each treatment arm, a 2-group large-sample normal approximation test of proportions with a 1-sided 5% significance level will have 90% power to detect noninferiority of the O-SES compared with the N-BES with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 3.0%.
The SORT OUT VII trial will determine whether the biodegradable polymers O-SES is noninferior to the N-BES with respect to driven event.
Long-term safety and efficacy for everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus those of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) are unknown.
This study compared 5-year outcomes for EES with those for SES from the SORT OUT IV (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome) trial.
Five-year follow-up was completed for 2,771 patients (99.9%). Primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and definite stent thrombosis.
At 5-years, MACE occurred in 14.0% and 17.4% in the EES and SES groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66 to 0.97; p = 0.02). The MACE rate did not differ significantly within the first year (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.19; p = 0.79), but from years 1 through 5, the MACE rate was lower with EES (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.90; p = 0.006; p interaction = 0.12). Definite stent thrombosis was lower with EES (0.4%) than with SES (2.0%; HR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.46), with a lower risk of very late definite stent thrombosis in the EES group (0.2% vs. 1.4%, respectively; HR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.53). When censoring the patients at the time of stent thrombosis, we found no significant differences between the 2 stent groups for MACE rates (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.08; p = 0.23), target lesion revascularization (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.27; p = 0.55), and MI (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.36; p = 0.72).
At 5-year follow-up, MACE rate was significantly lower with EES- than with SES-treated patients, due largely due to a lower risk of very late definite stent thrombosis. (Randomized Clinical Comparison of the Xience V and the Cypher Coronary Stents in Non-selected Patients With Coronary Heart Disease [SORT OUT IV]; NCT00552877).
Comment In: J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Feb 23;67(7):763-526892410
Distal embolization during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may result in reduced myocardial perfusion, infarct extension and impaired prognosis. In a prospective randomized trial, we assessed the effect of routine filterwire distal protection on scintigraphic estimated infarct size.
The effect of routine filterwire distal protection was evaluated in 344 patients with STEMI
Zotarolimus-eluting durable-polymer-coated stent versus a biolimus-eluting biodegradable-polymer-coated stent in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT VI): a randomised non-inferiority trial.
New-generation drug-eluting coronary stents have reduced the risk of coronary events, especially in patients with complex disease or lesions. To what extent different stent platforms, polymers, and antiproliferative drugs affect outcomes, however, is unclear. We investigated the safety and efficacy of a third-generation stent by comparing a highly biocompatible durable-polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable-polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent.
This open-label, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial was done at three sites across western Denmark. All patients who presented with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes and at least one coronary artery lesion (more than 50% stenosis) from March, 2011, to August, 2012, were assessed for eligibility. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent or the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target lesion) and efficacy (target-lesion revascularisation) at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat. The trial was powered to assess non-inferiority of durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent compared with the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent with a predetermined non-inferiority margin of 0·025. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01956448.
Of 7103 screened, 1502 patients with 1883 lesions were assigned to receive the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent and 1497 patients with 1791 lesions to receive the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent. 79 (5·3%) and 75 (5·0%) patients, respectively, met the primary endpoint (absolute risk difference 0·0025, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 0·016%; p=0·004). The individual components of the primary endpoint did not differ significantly between stent types at 12 months.
The durable-polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the biodegradable-polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients.
Medtronic Cardiovascular and Biosensors Interventional Technologies.