Key result
Zotarolimus-eluting stents had higher MACE rates than sirolimus-eluting stents in diabetics (13.8% vs 7.7%, P=0.05), but lower rates than paclitaxel stents in nondiabetics (10.3% vs 15.3%, P=0.01).
Why the study?
Do zotarolimus-eluting stents reduce major adverse cardiac events compared to sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in diabetic and nondiabetic patients?
RCT (n=2,645)
randomized
Do zotarolimus-eluting stents reduce major adverse cardiac events compared to sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in diabetic and nondiabetic patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 13.8% vs 7.7%
p-value: p=0.05
Sirolimus-eluting stents are associated with the lowest rate of MACE in diabetic patients, whereas both zotarolimus- and sirolimus-eluting stents are superior to paclitaxel-eluting stents in nondiabetic patients.
Favors sirolimus-eluting stents in diabetics; extends diabetes-specific stent outcome data from RCT.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the differential treatment effects of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) according to diabetic status. BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients have a higher risk of ischemic complications after stenting than nondiabetic patients. METHODS: Using data from the ZEST randomized trial, comparing ZES with SES and PES, we evaluated relative outcomes among stents in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Of the 2,645 patients enrolled in the ZEST trial, 760 (29%) had diabetes mellitus. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the three stent groups, regardless of diabetic status. In diabetic patients, ZES showed similar rates of MACE as compared to PES (13.8% vs. 15.3%, P = 0.58), but higher rates of MACE than SES (13.8% vs. 7.7%, P = 0.05). In nondiabetic patients, ZES showed similar rates of MACE as compared to SES (10.3% vs. 10.8%, P = 0.72), whereas significantly lower rates of MACE compared to PES (10.3% vs. 15.3%, P = 0.01). In comparing the ZES and SES groups, there was a substantial interaction between diabetic status and stent types on MACE occurrence (Interaction P = 0.07). However, in comparison of ZES and PES, there were no significant interactions between diabetes and stent type on MACE (Interaction P = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic patients, SES showed the lowest rate of MACE compared with ZES and PES. But, in nondiabetic patients, SES and ZES showed significantly lower rates of MACE than PES. ZES shows a diabetes-related interaction on MACE compared with SES, but not with PES.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jang et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease requiring stenting (n=2,645). Zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) vs. Sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization (p=0.05). Zotarolimus-eluting stents had higher MACE rates than sirolimus-eluting stents in diabetics (13.8% vs 7.7%, P=0.05), but lower rates than paclitaxel stents in nondiabetics (10.3% vs 15.3%, P=0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: