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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |