Key result
Everolimus-eluting stents increase 9-month minimal luminal diameter by ~0.5 mm versus BMS in NSTEMI.
Why the study?
Does everolimus-eluting stenting increase minimal luminal diameter and reduce restenosis in patients with NSTEMI compared to bare-metal stenting?
RCT (n=474)
Double-blind (operators and adjudicators)
Closed envelope system
Yes
Does everolimus-eluting stenting increase minimal luminal diameter and reduce restenosis in patients with NSTEMI compared to bare-metal stenting?
Absolute Event Rate: 2.37% vs 1.84%
p-value: p=<0.001
Second-generation everolimus-eluting stents are safe and effectively reduce both angiographic and clinical restenosis in NSTEMI patients compared to bare-metal stents.
Supports everolimus-eluting stents over bare-metal in NSTEMI; extends STEMI superiority data to this population.
OBJECTIVE: The superiority of drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is well studied; however, randomised data in patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) are lacking. The objective of this study was to investigate whether stenting with everolimus-eluting stents (EES) safely reduces restenosis in patients with NSTEMI as compared to BMS. METHODS: ELISA-3 patients were asked to participate in the angiographic substudy and were randomised to DE (Xience V) or BM (Vision) stenting (ELISA-3 group). The primary end point was minimal luminal diameter (MLD) at 9-month follow-up angiography. In addition, 296 patients with NSTEMI who were excluded or did not want to participate in the ELISA-3 trial (RELI group) were randomised to DE or BM stenting and underwent clinical follow-up only (major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stent thrombosis (ST)). A pooled analysis was performed to assess an effect on clinical outcome. RESULTS: 178 of 540 ELISA-3 patients participated in the angiographic substudy. MLD at 9 months angiography was 2.37±0.63 mm (DES) versus 1.84±0.62 mm (BMS), p<0.001. Binary restenosis occurred in 1.9% in the DES group versus 16.7% in the BMS group (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.84, p=0.007). In the pooled analysis, the incidence of MACE, target vessel revascularisation and ST at 2 years follow-up in the DES versus BMS group was 12.5% versus 16.0% (p=0.28), 4.0% versus 10.4% (p=0.009) and 1.3% versus 3.0% (p=0.34), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NSTEMI, use of EES is safe and decreases both angiographic and clinical restenosis as compared to BMS http://www.isrctn.com/search?q=39230163. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 39230163; Post-results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Remkes et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) (n=474). Everolimus-eluting stent vs. Bare-metal stent was evaluated on Minimal luminal diameter (MLD) at 9-month follow-up angiography (p=<0.001). Everolimus-eluting stents significantly increased minimal luminal diameter at 9 months (2.37 vs 1.84 mm, p<0.001) and reduced angiographic and clinical restenosis compared to bare-metal stents in patients with NSTEMI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: