Publikation

Long-Term Effect of Ultrathin-Strut Versus Thin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Randomized Trial

Wissenschaftlicher Artikel/Review - 06.08.2019

Bereiche
PubMed
DOI

Zitation
Iglesias J, Windecker S, Jüni P, Häner J, Cuculi F, Kaiser C, Weilenmann D, Cook S, Moarof I, Muller O, Noble S, Tüller D, Roffi M, Heg D, Pilgrim T. Long-Term Effect of Ultrathin-Strut Versus Thin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Randomized Trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2019; 12:e008024.
Art
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel/Review (Englisch)
Zeitschrift
Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2019; 12
Veröffentlichungsdatum
06.08.2019
eISSN (Online)
1941-7632
Seiten
e008024
Kurzbeschreibung/Zielsetzung

BACKGROUND
Randomized trials evaluating the Orsiro biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES; 60 and 80 μm strut thickness for stent diameters ≤3 and >3 mm, respectively) did not stratify according to vessel size and failed to specify the impact of ultrathin-strut thickness on long-term clinical outcomes compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES). We sought to assess the long-term effect of ultrathin-strut (60 μm) BP-SES versus thin-strut (81 μm) DP-EES on long-term outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization for small vessel disease.

METHODS
In a subgroup analysis of the randomized, multicenter, noninferiority BIOSCIENCE trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome randomly assigned to treatment with BP-SES or DP-EES were stratified according to vessel size (≤3 mm versus >3 mm) as a surrogate to compare patients treated with ultrathin-strut versus thin-strut drug-eluting stent. The primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, within 5 years.

RESULTS
Among 2109 patients, 1234 (59%) were treated for small vessel disease. At 5 years, target lesion failure occurred in 124 patients (cumulative incidence, 22.3%) treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES and 109 patients (18.3%) treated with thin-strut DP-EES (rate ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.94-1.58; =0.13). Cumulative incidences of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization and definite stent thrombosis at 5 years were similar in patients treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES and thin-strut DP-EES. After adjustment for potential confounders, there was no significant interaction between vessel size and treatment effect of BP-SES versus DP-EES.

CONCLUSIONS
We found no significant difference in clinical outcomes throughout 5 years between patients with small vessel disease treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES versus thin-strut DP-EES.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.