Why the study?
It was unknown whether the benefits of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents in avoiding late adverse events from durable polymers occur over longer-term follow-up.
Does an abluminal biodegradable-polymer coated sirolimus-eluting stent reduce target lesion failure compared to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing coronary revascularization?
Does an abluminal biodegradable-polymer coated sirolimus-eluting stent reduce target lesion failure compared to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing coronary revascularization?
An abluminal biodegradable-polymer coated sirolimus-eluting stent demonstrated comparable long-term safety and efficacy to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent at 5 years.
Provides longer-term RCT data on biodegradable vs durable polymer DES; extends evidence for polymer choice in PCI.
Background Drug - eluting stent (DES) with durable polymers have been proven to cause late or very late adverse events. Biodegradable polymer-coated DES was developed to address the risk by avoiding persistent inflammatory irritation from persistent polymers. However, it is unknown whether the benefits of biodegradable polymer DES will occur over longer time. Methods The trial was a prospective, multicenter and randomized non-inferiority clinical trial done in China. Patients with indications for stent implantation were assigned into Cordimax and Xience V group in a 2:1 allocation. The composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation (CI-TLR) was the primary endpoint target lesion failure (TLF). The pre-specified endpoint at five years was major adverse cardiac event (MACE) which was defined as a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and CI-TLR. Results 3266 patients (88.3%) completed 5-year follow-up. No difference was observed for TLF between Cordimax (7.5%) and Xience V (8.3%) group (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.15, P = 0.39). MACE occurred in 280 patients (11.4%) in Cordimax group and 162 patients (13.1%) in Xience V group (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.05, P = 0.13). The incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis did not differ in both groups (Cordimax 0.7%, Xience V 0.9%; RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.36 to 1.66; P = 0.51). Conclusion The biodegradable polymer Cordimax stent showed a comparable result to the durable polymer Xience V stent at 5 years, showing its long-term safety and efficacy performance. Trial registration: This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03185221 (14/06/2017).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cao et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: