Key result
Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation significantly reduced target lesion revascularisation (12% vs. 30%, p=0.001) and major adverse cardiac events at 5 years compared with bare metal stents.
Why the study?
Does sirolimus-eluting stent implantation reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients with totally occluded native coronary arteries compared to bare metal stent implantation?
RCT (n=200)
randomised
Does sirolimus-eluting stent implantation reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients with totally occluded native coronary arteries compared to bare metal stent implantation?
Sirolimus-eluting stents maintain superior clinical outcomes at 5 years compared to bare metal stents in patients with total coronary occlusions, despite a non-significant trend toward higher stent thrombosis.
Supports sirolimus-eluting stents over bare-metal stents in total occlusions; extends durable 5-year superiority to chronic total occlusion PCI.
AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine the five-year clinical outcome in patients enrolled in the Primary Stenting of Totally Occluded Native Coronary Arteries II (PRISON II) study. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with totally occluded coronary arteries were randomised to either sirolimus-eluting stent (SES, n=100) or bare metal stent (BMS, n=100) implantation. At five years, patients in the SES group had significantly lower rates of target lesion revascularisation (12% vs. 30%, p=0.001), target vessel revascularisation (17% vs. 34%, p=0.009) and major adverse cardiac events (12% vs. 36%, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in death and myocardial infarction. Eight (8%) cases of stent thrombosis (seven definite and one probable; one early, one late, and six very late) were noticed in the SES group versus three cases (3%, one definite and two possible; all very late) in the BMS group (p=0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study show that the documented superior short-term angiographic and clinical results of SES in patients with total coronary occlusions are maintained during long-term 5-year follow-up as compared with BMS. On the other hand, there is a trend to a higher stent thrombosis rate in the SES group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Branden et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in totally occluded native coronary arteries (n=200). Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation vs. Bare metal stent (BMS) implantation was evaluated on target lesion revascularisation (p=0.001). Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation significantly reduced target lesion revascularisation (12% vs. 30%, p=0.001) and major adverse cardiac events at 5 years compared with bare metal stents.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: