Real-world Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Zotarolimus-eluting Stents versus Non-zotarolimus-eluting Stents for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background: Current-generation zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) have been shown to be an effective choice for percutaneous coronary intervention. However, data comparing real-world clinical outcomes between ZES and other stent platforms (non-ZES) are limited. We aim to compare real-world clinical outcomes of patients receiving ZES versus non-ZES during percutaneous coronary intervention based on our centre’s registry. Methods: This was a non-randomised, non-blinded, all-comers observational registry comparing clinical outcomes in patients treated with ZES versus non-ZES (control). The primary endpoint of our study was defined as major adverse cardiac events, which was a composite of cardiac mortality, target vessel failure and MI at 1 year. Results: Within the study period, 526 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria (ZES: 218, controls: 308). Characteristics and procedural data of both groups were similar. Our study showed no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events between the ZES and control groups (3.2% versus 3.9%; HR 0.82; 95% CI [0.32–2.09]; p=0.68). Comparing clinical outcomes of ZES and control groups, there were similar rates of all-cause mortality (1.4% versus 2.3%; HR 0.60; 95% CI [0.16–2.33]; p=0.46) and MI (0.5% versus 1.0%; HR 0.47; 95% CI [0.049–4.49]; p=0.51). There were low rates of stent-related complications and no differences in target vessel revascularisation (1.4% versus 0.7%; HR 2.12; 95% CI [0.36–12.7]; p=0.41) and target vessel failure (1.4% versus 0.7%; HR 2.12; 95% CI [0.36–12.7]; p=0.41) between the ZES and control groups. Conclusion: Our study showed no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients receiving ZES and those receiving non-ZES.