Key result
Sirolimus-eluting stents did not significantly reduce 12-month major adverse cardiac events compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with acute STEMI (5.8% vs. 11.7%, P=0.07).
Why the study?
Does sirolimus-eluting stent deployment reduce major adverse cardiac events compared to paclitaxel-eluting stent deployment in acute STEMI patients undergoing primary angioplasty?
RCT (n=308)
randomly assigned
Does sirolimus-eluting stent deployment reduce major adverse cardiac events compared to paclitaxel-eluting stent deployment in acute STEMI patients undergoing primary angioplasty?
Absolute Event Rate: 5.8% vs 11.7%
p-value: p=0.07
In patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary angioplasty, sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduced angiographic restenosis and late loss compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents, though the reduction in 12-month MACE was not statistically significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sirolimus-eluting stents showed no MACE superiority versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in STEMI; leaves open whether angiographic gains improve clinical outcomes.
Lee et al. (2008) conducted an RCT in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=308). Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) vs. Paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) was evaluated on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, reinfarction, stent thrombosis, and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months (p=0.07). Sirolimus-eluting stents did not significantly reduce 12-month major adverse cardiac events compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with acute STEMI (5.8% vs. 11.7%, P=0.07).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: