Vlieger S, Danzi GB, Kauer F, Oemrawsingh RM, Stojkovic S, IJsselmuiden AJ, Routledge H, Laanmets P, Roffi M, Fröbert O, Baello P, Wlodarczak A, Puentes A, Polad J, Hildick-Smith D. One-year performance of thin-strut cobalt chromium sirolimus-eluting stent versus thicker strut stainless steel biolimus-eluting coronary stent: a propensity-matched analysis of two international all-comers registries.
Coron Artery Dis 2021;
32:391-396. [PMID:
33060529 PMCID:
PMC8248251 DOI:
10.1097/mca.0000000000000958]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2020] [Accepted: 08/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/05/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
Recent improvements in coronary stent design have focussed on thinner struts, different alloys and architecture, more biocompatible polymers, and shorter drug absorption times. This study evaluates safety and efficacy of a newer generation thin-strut cobalt chromium sirolimus-eluting coronary stent (SES, Ultimaster) in comparison with a second-generation thicker strut stainless steel biolimus-eluting stent (BES, Nobori) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice.
METHODS
A propensity score analysis was performed to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics of 8137 SES patients and 2738 BES patients of two PCI registries (e-Ultimaster and NOBORI 2). An independent clinical event committee adjudicated all endpoint-related adverse events.
RESULTS
The use of SES, as compared with BES was associated with a significantly lower rate of myocardial infarction (MI) (1.2% vs 2.2%; P = 0.0006) and target vessel-related MI (1.1% vs 1.8%; P = 0.002) at 1 year. One-year composite endpoints of all predefined endpoints were lower in patients undergoing SES implantation (target lesion failure: 3.2% vs 4.1%; P = 0.03, target vessel failure: 3.7% vs 5.0%; P = 0.003, patient-oriented composite endpoint 5.7% vs 6.8%; P = 0.03). No significant differences between SES and BES were observed in all-cause death (2.0% vs 1.6%; P = 0.19), cardiac death (1.2% vs 1.2%; P = 0.76) or stent thrombosis (0.6% vs 0.8%; P = 0.43).
CONCLUSIONS
These findings suggest an improved clinical safety and efficacy of a newer generation thin-strut SES as compared with a second-generation thicker strut BES.
Collapse