Key result
The BuMA Supreme stent will be evaluated for non-inferiority compared to the XIENCE stent regarding stent-strut neointimal coverage rate at 1 and 2 months in patients with high-bleeding-risk coronary artery disease.
Why the study?
Limited studies directly evaluate early neointima formation at 1 and 2 months post-stenting in high-bleeding-risk CAD patients to support shortening DAPT duration.
Does the BuMA Supreme stent improve early stent-strut neointimal coverage compared to the Xience stent in high-bleeding-risk CAD patients?
RCT (n=80)
Single-blind (blinded core laboratory evaluation)
1:1 ratio, central randomized method
Yes
Does the BuMA Supreme stent improve early stent-strut neointimal coverage compared to the Xience stent in high-bleeding-risk CAD patients?
This study protocol outlines a randomized trial to compare early neointimal healing between the BuMA Supreme and Xience stents using OCT, which may inform optimal dual antiplatelet therapy duration in high-bleeding-risk patients.
BuMA Supreme non-inferiority testing for early neointimal coverage versus XIENCE in high-bleeding-risk CAD; extends healing data to potentially guide shorter DAPT.
BACKGROUND: Earlier vascular healing after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation may reduce the incidence of late stent thrombosis and provide theoretical evidence to shorten dual antiplatelet therapy duration in patients with high bleeding risks. The BuMA supreme stent is a newly developed DES-coated with the sirolimus by using the international patent electronic grafted eG™ technology. Previous randomized trials showed that BuMA stents had better stent-strut coverage at 3-month follow-ups, which were evaluated by optical coherence tomography (OCT). However, there have been a limited number of studies that are directly evaluating the extent of neointima formation at the first and second months after stent implantation in high-bleeding-risk patients with coronary artery disease. This clinical trial is designed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the BuMA supreme stent compared to the XIENCE stent in early neointimal formation. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial. Forty patients will be assigned into the first-month OCT group, and another 40 patients into the second-month OCT group. The patients in each cohort will be randomized again into two groups in a 1:1 ratio, either being implanted with the BuMA Supreme stent or the Xience V/Prime/Xpedition stent. The primary endpoint is stent-strut neointimal coverage rate (%) at the first and second months, respectively. Secondary endpoints include neointimal hyperplasia area/volume, neointimal hyperplasia thickness, stent-strut malapposition rate, late lumen loss (LLL), restenosis rate, device/lesion/clinical success rate, device-oriented composite endpoints at the first and second months, stent thrombosis and other serious adverse events and bleeding events at follow-up. DISCUSSION: The results will provide the first accurate imaging evidence on neointimal formation of the BuMA Supreme stent and the Xience stent at 1-2 months post PCI. The result should inspire further exploration and adjustment of DAPT treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02747329 . Registered on 21 April 2016. Last updated 17 May 2018.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease with high bleeding risk (n=80). BuMA Supreme stent vs. XIENCE stent was evaluated on Stent-strut neointimal coverage rate (%) at 1 and 2 months. The BuMA Supreme stent will be evaluated for non-inferiority compared to the XIENCE stent regarding stent-strut neointimal coverage rate at 1 and 2 months in patients with high-bleeding-risk coronary artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: