Cargando…

Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial

BACKGROUND: No data are available on the long‐term performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus‐eluting stents (BP‐SES). We reported 2‐year clinical outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zbinden, Rainer, Piccolo, Raffaele, Heg, Dik, Roffi, Marco, Kurz, David J., Muller, Olivier, Vuilliomenet, André, Cook, Stéphane, Weilenmann, Daniel, Kaiser, Christoph, Jamshidi, Peiman, Franzone, Anna, Eberli, Franz, Jüni, Peter, Windecker, Stephan, Pilgrim, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26979080
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.116.003255
_version_ 1782442567848165376
author Zbinden, Rainer
Piccolo, Raffaele
Heg, Dik
Roffi, Marco
Kurz, David J.
Muller, Olivier
Vuilliomenet, André
Cook, Stéphane
Weilenmann, Daniel
Kaiser, Christoph
Jamshidi, Peiman
Franzone, Anna
Eberli, Franz
Jüni, Peter
Windecker, Stephan
Pilgrim, Thomas
author_facet Zbinden, Rainer
Piccolo, Raffaele
Heg, Dik
Roffi, Marco
Kurz, David J.
Muller, Olivier
Vuilliomenet, André
Cook, Stéphane
Weilenmann, Daniel
Kaiser, Christoph
Jamshidi, Peiman
Franzone, Anna
Eberli, Franz
Jüni, Peter
Windecker, Stephan
Pilgrim, Thomas
author_sort Zbinden, Rainer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: No data are available on the long‐term performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus‐eluting stents (BP‐SES). We reported 2‐year clinical outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation) trial, which compared BP‐SES with durable‐polymer everolimus‐eluting stents (DP‐EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 2119 patients with minimal exclusion criteria were assigned to treatment with BP‐SES (n=1063) or DP‐EES (n=1056). Follow‐up at 2 years was available for 2048 patients (97%). The primary end point was target‐lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target‐vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target‐lesion revascularization. At 2 years, target‐lesion failure occurred in 107 patients (10.5%) in the BP‐SES arm and 107 patients (10.4%) in the DP‐EES arm (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.77–1.31, P=0.979). There were no significant differences between BP‐SES and DP‐EES with respect to cardiac death (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62–1.63, P=0.984), target‐vessel myocardial infarction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60–1.39, P=0.669), target‐lesion revascularization (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.81–1.71, P=0.403), and definite stent thrombosis (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.56–3.44, P=0.485). There were 2 cases (0.2%) of definite very late stent thrombosis in the BP‐SES arm and 4 cases (0.4%) in the DP‐EES arm (P=0.423). In the prespecified subgroup of patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction, BP‐SES was associated with a lower risk of target‐lesion failure compared with DP‐EES (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23–0.99, P=0.043, P (interaction)=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Comparable safety and efficacy profiles of BP‐SES and DP‐EES were maintained throughout 2 years of follow‐up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4943287
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49432872016-07-20 Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial Zbinden, Rainer Piccolo, Raffaele Heg, Dik Roffi, Marco Kurz, David J. Muller, Olivier Vuilliomenet, André Cook, Stéphane Weilenmann, Daniel Kaiser, Christoph Jamshidi, Peiman Franzone, Anna Eberli, Franz Jüni, Peter Windecker, Stephan Pilgrim, Thomas J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: No data are available on the long‐term performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus‐eluting stents (BP‐SES). We reported 2‐year clinical outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation) trial, which compared BP‐SES with durable‐polymer everolimus‐eluting stents (DP‐EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 2119 patients with minimal exclusion criteria were assigned to treatment with BP‐SES (n=1063) or DP‐EES (n=1056). Follow‐up at 2 years was available for 2048 patients (97%). The primary end point was target‐lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target‐vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target‐lesion revascularization. At 2 years, target‐lesion failure occurred in 107 patients (10.5%) in the BP‐SES arm and 107 patients (10.4%) in the DP‐EES arm (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.77–1.31, P=0.979). There were no significant differences between BP‐SES and DP‐EES with respect to cardiac death (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62–1.63, P=0.984), target‐vessel myocardial infarction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60–1.39, P=0.669), target‐lesion revascularization (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.81–1.71, P=0.403), and definite stent thrombosis (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.56–3.44, P=0.485). There were 2 cases (0.2%) of definite very late stent thrombosis in the BP‐SES arm and 4 cases (0.4%) in the DP‐EES arm (P=0.423). In the prespecified subgroup of patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction, BP‐SES was associated with a lower risk of target‐lesion failure compared with DP‐EES (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23–0.99, P=0.043, P (interaction)=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Comparable safety and efficacy profiles of BP‐SES and DP‐EES were maintained throughout 2 years of follow‐up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4943287/ /pubmed/26979080 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.116.003255 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Zbinden, Rainer
Piccolo, Raffaele
Heg, Dik
Roffi, Marco
Kurz, David J.
Muller, Olivier
Vuilliomenet, André
Cook, Stéphane
Weilenmann, Daniel
Kaiser, Christoph
Jamshidi, Peiman
Franzone, Anna
Eberli, Franz
Jüni, Peter
Windecker, Stephan
Pilgrim, Thomas
Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial
title Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial
title_full Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial
title_fullStr Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial
title_full_unstemmed Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial
title_short Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial
title_sort ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus‐eluting stent versus durable‐polymer everolimus‐eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularization: 2‐year results of the bioscience trial
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26979080
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.116.003255
work_keys_str_mv AT zbindenrainer ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT piccoloraffaele ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT hegdik ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT roffimarco ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT kurzdavidj ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT mullerolivier ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT vuilliomenetandre ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT cookstephane ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT weilenmanndaniel ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT kaiserchristoph ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT jamshidipeiman ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT franzoneanna ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT eberlifranz ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT junipeter ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT windeckerstephan ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial
AT pilgrimthomas ultrathinstrutbiodegradablepolymersirolimuselutingstentversusdurablepolymereverolimuselutingstentforpercutaneouscoronaryrevascularization2yearresultsofthebiosciencetrial