Key result
The biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent FIREHAWK was non-inferior to the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for 9-month in-stent late lumen loss (P<0.0001 for non-inferiority).
Why the study?
Does an abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent reduce in-stent late lumen loss in patients with single de novo coronary lesions compared to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent?
RCT (n=458)
centrally randomised
Yes
Does an abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent reduce in-stent late lumen loss in patients with single de novo coronary lesions compared to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent?
Mean Difference: 0 (95% CI -0.04–0.04)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.13% vs 0.13%
p-value: p=<0.0001 for non-inferiority
A novel biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent is non-inferior to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent regarding 9-month in-stent late lumen loss in patients with single de novo coronary lesions.
Supports FIREHAWK as a noninferior alternative for de novo lesions; extends evidence for biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer platforms.
AIMS: The study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FIREHAWK, a novel abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) for treating patients with single de novo coronary lesions compared with the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) XIENCE V. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 458 patients with single de novo native coronary lesions ≤24 mm in length and a coronary artery ≥2.25 to ≤4.0 mm in diameter were enrolled in the TARGET I study, a prospective, randomised, non-inferiority trial. The primary endpoint was in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) at nine-month follow-up. The secondary endpoint, target lesion failure (TLF), was defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (iTLR). Patients were centrally randomised to treatment with either biodegradable polymer SES (n=227) or durable polymer EES (n=231). The nine-month in-stent LLL of the biodegradable polymer SES was comparable to the EES group (0.13 ± 0.24 mm vs. 0.13 ± 0.18 mm, p=0.94; difference and 95% confidence interval 0.00 [-0.04, 0.04] mm; p for non-inferiority <0.0001). Cardiac death (0.4% vs. 0.0%), TVMI (1.3% vs. 1.7%), iTLR (0.4% vs. 0.4%) and TLF (2.2% vs. 2.2%) were similar between the biodegradable polymer SES and durable polymer EES groups at 12-month follow-up (all p>0.05). No definite/probable stent thrombosis was observed in both of these groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the multicentre TARGET I trial, the novel abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer SES FIREHAWK was non-inferior to the durable polymer EES XIENCE V with respect to the primary endpoint of in-stent LLL at nine months for treating patients with single de novo coronary lesions. The incidences of clinical endpoints were low in both of the stents at 12-month follow-up. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01196819).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2013) conducted an RCT in single de novo coronary lesions (n=458). abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (FIREHAWK) vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (XIENCE V) was evaluated on in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) at nine-month follow-up (difference 0.00 mm, 95% CI -0.04, 0.04, p=<0.0001 for non-inferiority). The biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent FIREHAWK was non-inferior to the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for 9-month in-stent late lumen loss (P<0.0001 for non-inferiority).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: