Why the study?
Few studies have evaluated the long-term comparative performance of durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents versus resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndrome.
Does everolimus-eluting stent reduce the composite of mortality, MI, stroke, repeat PCI, and stent thrombosis compared to resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI?
Does everolimus-eluting stent reduce the composite of mortality, MI, stroke, repeat PCI, and stent thrombosis compared to resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI?
In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, everolimus-eluting stents were associated with a significantly lower 5-year risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents, with differences emerging after the first year.
Among drug-eluting stents (DESs), the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) are widely used in clinical practice and have contributed to improve the outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Few studies addressed their long-term comparative performance in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to investigate the 5 year comparative efficacy of EES and R-ZES in ACS. We queried ACTION-ACS, a large-scale database of ACS patients undergoing PCI. The treatment groups were analyzed using propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a composite of mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, repeat PCI, and definite or probable stent thrombosis, which was addressed at the five-year follow-up. A total of 3497 matched patients were analyzed. Compared with R-ZES, a significant reduction in the primary endpoint at 5 years was observed in patients treated with EES (hazard ratio (HR) [95%CI] = 0.62 [0.54–0.71], p < 0.001). By landmark analysis, differences between the two devices emerged after the first year and were maintained thereafter. The individual endpoints of mortality (HR [95%CI] = 0.70 [0.58–0.84], p < 0.01), MI (HR [95%CI] = 0.55 [0.42–0.74], p < 0.001), and repeat PCI (HR [95%CI] = 0.65 [0.53–0.73], p < 0.001) were all significantly lower in the EES-treated patients. Stroke risk did not differ between EES and R-ZES. In ACS, a greater long-term clinical efficacy with EES vs. R-ZES was observed. This difference became significant after the first year of the ACS episode and persisted thereafter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Koni et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: