Key result
Genoss DES matches Orsiro for 2-year device-oriented composite outcomes in real-world practice.
Why the study?
To investigate the safety and efficacy of two ultrathin biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (Orsiro and Genoss DES) in real-world practice.
Does the Genoss DES stent have comparable safety and efficacy to the Orsiro stent in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in real-world practice?
Observational (n=1,682)
No
Does the Genoss DES stent have comparable safety and efficacy to the Orsiro stent in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in real-world practice?
The ultrathin biodegradable polymer Genoss sirolimus-eluting stent demonstrated equivalent 2-year safety and efficacy outcomes compared to the widely used Orsiro stent in routine clinical practice.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Comparable 2-year outcomes in matched real-world patients should not change practice; leaves randomized confirmation open.
BACKGROUND: The Orsiro and Genoss DES stents are biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (DESs) with ultrathin struts. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of these two ultrathin DESs in real-world practice. METHODS: From a single-center prospective registry, we included 751 and 931 patients treated with the Genoss DES and Orsiro stents, respectively. After propensity score matching, we compared 483 patients in each group with respect to a device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO), which comprised cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization up to 2 follow-up years. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, there were no significant between-group differences in clinical and angiographic characteristics. During the median follow-up period of 730 days (interquartile range, 427-730 days), there was no significant between-group difference in the DOCO rate (3.1% in the Genoss DES group vs. 2.9% in the Orsiro group, log-rank p = 0.847). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy between the Orsiro and Genoss DES stents during a 2-year follow-up period in real-world practice. However, this result should be confirmed in a large randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02038127.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeon et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n=1,682). Genoss DES stent vs. Orsiro stent was evaluated on Device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO) comprising cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.49-2.09, p=0.847). The Genoss DES stent demonstrated comparable rates of device-oriented composite outcomes to the Orsiro stent at 2 years in real-world practice (3.1% vs 2.9%, HR 1.01).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: