Cargando…

Outcomes of patients treated with the everolimus-eluting stent versus the zotarolimus eluting stent in a consecutive cohort of patients at a tertiary medical center

BACKGROUND: In this study we compared the outcomes of the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) versus the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in patients treated at a tertiary medical center, with up to one year of follow-up. METHODS: Unselected consecutive patients were retrospectively recruited following st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shammas, Nicolas W, Shammas, Gail A, Nader, Elie, Jerin, Michael, Mrad, Luay, Marogil, Peter, Henn, Courtney, Dvorak, Alex, Chintalapani, Archana, Meriner, Susan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3333470/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22536075
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S30122
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In this study we compared the outcomes of the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) versus the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in patients treated at a tertiary medical center, with up to one year of follow-up. METHODS: Unselected consecutive patients were retrospectively recruited following stenting with the ZES (n = 197) or EES (n = 190). The first 100 consecutive patients in each cohort underwent syntax scoring. The primary endpoint of the study was target vessel failure, defined as the combined endpoint of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Secondary endpoints included target lesion revascularization, target lesion failure, acute stent thrombosis, total death, cardiac death, and non-fatal myocardial infarction. RESULTS: The two groups were similar, including for Syntax scores (19.6 ± 12.8 versus 20.6 ± 13.6), number of stents per patient (2.9 ± 1.9 versus 2.9 ± 2.1), and cardiovascular risk factors. By one year, the primary outcome occurred in 20.8% EES versus 26.7% ZES (P = 0.19) patients. The secondary endpoints were as follows: target lesion revascularization (8.9% versus 20.6%, P = 0.003), target vessel revascularization (18.9% versus 25.6%, P = 0.142), definite and probable stent thrombosis (0% versus 2.5%), non-fatal myocardial infarction (2.7% versus 3.6%), and mortality (3.2% versus 5.1%) for the EES versus the ZES, respectively. CONCLUSION: EES had similar target vessel failure to ZES, but superior target lesion revascularization and target lesion failure at one year of follow-up in an unselected cohort of patients.