Key result
Zotarolimus-eluting stents cut stent thrombosis ~37% vs. sirolimus-eluting stents.
Why the study?
Long-term clinical safety differences between zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents with different healing characteristics were uncertain.
Does a zotarolimus-eluting stent reduce stent thrombosis compared with a sirolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing elective or emergency PCI?
RCT (n=8,791)
Open-label
Does a zotarolimus-eluting stent reduce stent thrombosis compared with a sirolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing elective or emergency PCI?
At 4-year follow-up, the zotarolimus-eluting stent demonstrated a superior safety profile compared to the sirolimus-eluting stent, significantly reducing the risk of stent thrombosis and the composite of death or large MI.
Supports E-ZES preference over C-SES in PCI to lower thrombosis risk; confirms long-term safety advantage in this RCT.
AIMS: To compare the long-term clinical safety between two drug-eluting stents with different healing characteristics in the Patient Related Outcomes with Endeavour (E-ZES) vs. Cypher (C-SES) Stenting Trial (PROTECT). At 3 years, there was no difference in the primary outcome of definite or probable stent thrombosis or in the other main secondary clinical outcomes consisting of the composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI). Prespecified 4-year clinical follow-up was analysed. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient Related OuTcomes with Endeavour vs. Cypher Stenting Trial was a prospective, open-label randomized-controlled superiority trial powered to look at differences in long-term clinical safety, including stent thrombosis. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was prescribed for ≥ 3 months and up to 12 months based on current guidelines. Patient Related OuTcomes with Endeavour vs. Cypher Stenting Trial enrolled 8791 patients undergoing elective or emergency PCI to E-ZES or C-SES. There was no difference in DAPT usage between the two groups up to 4 years. At 4-year follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 1.6% of E-ZES vs. 2.6% of C-SES patients [HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.46-0.85), P = 0.003]. The composite of all-cause death or large MI occurred in 6.7% of E-ZES vs. 8.0% of C-SES-treated patients [HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.71-0.98), P = 0.024]. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-eluting coronary stents with different healing characteristics demonstrated different late safety profiles: after 4 years, compared with C-SES, E-ZES reduced the risk of stent thrombosis and the risk of the composite endpoints of death or MI. Appropriately powered large-scale trials with long-term follow-up are critical to determine clinical safety and efficacy of permanently implanted coronary stents. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00476957.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wijns et al. (2014) conducted an RCT in Patients undergoing PCI (n=8,791). Endeavour zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) vs. Cypher sirolimus-eluting stent (C-SES) was evaluated on Definite or probable stent thrombosis (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.85, p=0.003). The Endeavour zotarolimus-eluting stent reduced definite or probable stent thrombosis compared to the Cypher sirolimus-eluting stent (1.6% vs 2.6%; HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.46-0.85; P=0.003).
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: