Cargando…
One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis
BACKGROUND: Polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents (PF‐AES) represent a novel elution‐technology in coronary stenting. We aimed to assess 1‐year clinical outcomes of PF‐AES as compared to latest‐generation permanent polymer zotarolimus‐eluting stents (PP‐ZES) in a real‐world all‐comers setting. METH...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6619187/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30604493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28041 |
_version_ | 1783433908676722688 |
---|---|
author | Rozemeijer, Rik van Muiden, Ivar G. Koudstaal, Stefan Leenders, Geert E. Timmers, Leo Rittersma, Saskia Z. Kraaijeveld, Adriaan O. Doevendans, Pieter A. Voskuil, Michiel Stella, Pieter R. |
author_facet | Rozemeijer, Rik van Muiden, Ivar G. Koudstaal, Stefan Leenders, Geert E. Timmers, Leo Rittersma, Saskia Z. Kraaijeveld, Adriaan O. Doevendans, Pieter A. Voskuil, Michiel Stella, Pieter R. |
author_sort | Rozemeijer, Rik |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents (PF‐AES) represent a novel elution‐technology in coronary stenting. We aimed to assess 1‐year clinical outcomes of PF‐AES as compared to latest‐generation permanent polymer zotarolimus‐eluting stents (PP‐ZES) in a real‐world all‐comers setting. METHODS: A prospective registry of patients treated with either PF‐AES or PP‐ZES between 2014 and 2016 was conducted. The primary outcome was defined as major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and the secondary outcome was defined as target‐lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year. To account for measured confounders, a propensity‐score adjusted Cox proportional‐hazard model was built to evaluate clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 734 consecutive patients with 1,269 DES implantations were enrolled. The population was characterized by 28% diabetes, 24% ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction, and a high number of complex lesions (69%). The rate of MACCE was 11.5% for PF‐AES and 13.6% for PP‐ZES, p(log‐rank) = 0.11. TLF was numerically lower in PF‐AES as compared to PP‐ZES (5.4 vs. 6.1%, p(log‐rank) = 0.68). After propensity‐score adjustment, PF‐AES showed a trend toward a lower rate of MACCE and a favorable rate of TLF as compared to PP‐ZES (HR 0.70; 95%CI 0.45 to 1.10, P = 0.12; and HR 0.88; 95%CI 0.47 to 1.65, P = 0.68, respectively). Rates of definite ST were low (0.8 vs. 0.3%, p(log‐rank) = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that implantation of PF‐AES was safe and effective in real‐world patients, with low‐rates of MACCE and TLF at 1 year. Our data needs to be confirmed by a large trial to evaluate the clinical outcomes of this novel polymer‐free, eluting‐technology used in PF‐AES. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6619187 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66191872019-07-22 One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis Rozemeijer, Rik van Muiden, Ivar G. Koudstaal, Stefan Leenders, Geert E. Timmers, Leo Rittersma, Saskia Z. Kraaijeveld, Adriaan O. Doevendans, Pieter A. Voskuil, Michiel Stella, Pieter R. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE BACKGROUND: Polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents (PF‐AES) represent a novel elution‐technology in coronary stenting. We aimed to assess 1‐year clinical outcomes of PF‐AES as compared to latest‐generation permanent polymer zotarolimus‐eluting stents (PP‐ZES) in a real‐world all‐comers setting. METHODS: A prospective registry of patients treated with either PF‐AES or PP‐ZES between 2014 and 2016 was conducted. The primary outcome was defined as major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and the secondary outcome was defined as target‐lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year. To account for measured confounders, a propensity‐score adjusted Cox proportional‐hazard model was built to evaluate clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 734 consecutive patients with 1,269 DES implantations were enrolled. The population was characterized by 28% diabetes, 24% ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction, and a high number of complex lesions (69%). The rate of MACCE was 11.5% for PF‐AES and 13.6% for PP‐ZES, p(log‐rank) = 0.11. TLF was numerically lower in PF‐AES as compared to PP‐ZES (5.4 vs. 6.1%, p(log‐rank) = 0.68). After propensity‐score adjustment, PF‐AES showed a trend toward a lower rate of MACCE and a favorable rate of TLF as compared to PP‐ZES (HR 0.70; 95%CI 0.45 to 1.10, P = 0.12; and HR 0.88; 95%CI 0.47 to 1.65, P = 0.68, respectively). Rates of definite ST were low (0.8 vs. 0.3%, p(log‐rank) = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that implantation of PF‐AES was safe and effective in real‐world patients, with low‐rates of MACCE and TLF at 1 year. Our data needs to be confirmed by a large trial to evaluate the clinical outcomes of this novel polymer‐free, eluting‐technology used in PF‐AES. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2019-01-02 2019-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6619187/ /pubmed/30604493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28041 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the 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 | CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE Rozemeijer, Rik van Muiden, Ivar G. Koudstaal, Stefan Leenders, Geert E. Timmers, Leo Rittersma, Saskia Z. Kraaijeveld, Adriaan O. Doevendans, Pieter A. Voskuil, Michiel Stella, Pieter R. One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
title | One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
title_full | One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
title_fullStr | One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
title_short | One‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: A propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
title_sort | one‐year clinical outcomes of patients treated with polymer‐free amphilimus‐eluting stents or zotarolimus‐eluting stents: a propensity‐score adjusted analysis |
topic | CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6619187/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30604493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28041 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rozemeijerrik oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT vanmuidenivarg oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT koudstaalstefan oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT leendersgeerte oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT timmersleo oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT rittersmasaskiaz oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT kraaijeveldadriaano oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT doevendanspietera oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT voskuilmichiel oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis AT stellapieterr oneyearclinicaloutcomesofpatientstreatedwithpolymerfreeamphilimuselutingstentsorzotarolimuselutingstentsapropensityscoreadjustedanalysis |