Title of article :
Two-Year Outcome of Patients Treated With Sirolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in an Unselected Population With Coronary Artery Disease (from the REWARDS Registry)
Author/Authors :
Roy، نويسنده , , Probal and Bonello، نويسنده , , Laurent and de Labriolle، نويسنده , , Axel and Okabe، نويسنده , , Teruo and Pinto Slottow، نويسنده , , Tina L. and Steinberg، نويسنده , , Daniel H. and Torguson، نويسنده , , Rebecca D. Smith، نويسنده , , Kimberly and Xue، نويسنده , , Zhenyi and Satler، نويسنده , , Lowell F. and Kent، نويسنده , , Kenneth M. and Suddath، نويسنده , , William O. and P، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2008
Abstract :
Multiple studies comparing sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with coronary artery disease have been performed. Despite these comparisons, it remains uncertain whether a differential in long-term efficacy and safety exists. Unselected patients treated exclusively with 1 drug-eluting stent type were enrolled in the Registry Experience at the Washington Hospital Center with Drug-Eluting Stents. There were 2,099 patients (3,766 lesions) treated with SES and 1,079 patients (1,850 lesions) treated with PES. Patients were followed at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years for the clinical endpoints of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and definite and definite/probable stent thrombosis. Patients in the SES group had more dyslipidemia, history of congestive heart failure, and ostial lesions; patients treated with PES had more previous coronary artery bypass surgery, unstable angina, and type C lesions. At 2 years, unadjusted major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (22.6% vs 21.1%, p = 0.3) and target vessel revascularization (13.3% vs 11.2%, p = 0.1) were comparable. The incidence of definite stent thrombosis was higher in the SES group (1.8% vs 0.9%, p = 0.05) driven by early events. Similar results were seen after adjustment for baseline differences: MACE (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9 to 1.3, p = 0.5), definite stent thrombosis (hazard ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 5.2, p = 0.05), and target vessel revascularization (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.4, p = 0.4). The incidence and rate of late stent thrombosis (>30 days) were similar (0.7% vs 0.5%, p = 0.4 and 0.24%/year, both groups, respectively). In conclusion, no major differential in long-term safety or efficacy was detected between SES and PES; both stent types were efficacious in reducing revascularization but were limited by a small continual increase in late stent thrombosis.
Journal title :
American Journal of Cardiology
Journal title :
American Journal of Cardiology