Key result
MiStent biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents showed similar rates of device-oriented composite endpoints compared to Xience everolimus-eluting stents at 3 years (10.5% vs 11.5%; P=0.55).
Why the study?
Data on long-term clinical outcomes with a novel ultrathin drug-eluting stent remained limited.
Does ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent reduce device-oriented composite end point in all-comers patients requiring coronary revascularization compared to thin-strut permanent polymer Xience everolimus-eluting stent?
RCT (n=1,398)
Single-blind
1:1
Yes
Does ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent reduce device-oriented composite end point in all-comers patients requiring coronary revascularization compared to thin-strut permanent polymer Xience everolimus-eluting stent?
Absolute Event Rate: 10.5% vs 11.5%
p-value: p=0.55
The ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent demonstrated comparable 3-year safety and efficacy to the permanent polymer Xience everolimus-eluting stent in an all-comers population.
Supports either stent choice without preference in all-comers; confirms comparable long-term performance of ultrathin biodegradable- versus permanent-polymer platforms.
Background: Numerous randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the superiority of thin-strut biodegradable polymer second-generation drug-eluting stent to the first-generation drug-eluting stent and the noninferiority to the thin-strut second-generation permanent polymer drug-eluting stent. Data on long-term clinical outcomes with a novel ultrathin drug-eluting stent, to date, are limited. Methods: The DESSOLVE III trial (Multicenter Randomized Study of the MiStent Sirolimus Eluting Absorbable Polymer Stent System for Revascularization of Coronary Arteries; n=1398) is a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, all-comers, randomized controlled trial (NCT02385279), allocating in a 1:1 ratio to either ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent or to thin-strut permanent polymer Xience everolimus-eluting stent. The primary end point was device-oriented composite end point, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. The secondary end point was patient-oriented composite end point, defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization. Results: At 3 years, follow-up data were available in 1381 patients (98.8%). The primary end point of device-oriented composite end point occurred in 10.5% for MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent and in 11.5% for Xience everolimus-eluting stent ( P =0.55). Rates of cardiac death (3.9% versus 3.8%; P =0.88), target vessel myocardial infarction (3.2% versus 2.5%; P =0.43), and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (5.2% versus 6.5%; P =0.30) did not differ significantly between the 2 devices. The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis was infrequent and similar between the 2 arms (1.2% versus 1.5%; P =0.64). The 90-day landmark analysis showed no significant difference in device-oriented composite end point between the 2 groups after polymer degradation of MiStent. The risk of patient-oriented composite end point was comparable between the 2 groups (22.7% versus 22.9%; P =0.34). Conclusions: In the DESSOLVE III trial, early safety and efficacy with MiStent sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent are confirmed at a longer term follow-up when compared with Xience everolimus-eluting permanent polymer-coated stent in a large all-comers population. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02385279.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Takahashi et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease requiring revascularization (n=1,398). MiStent biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent vs. Xience permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent was evaluated on Device-oriented composite end point (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization) (p=0.55). MiStent biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents showed similar rates of device-oriented composite endpoints compared to Xience everolimus-eluting stents at 3 years (10.5% vs 11.5%; P=0.55).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: