Key result
MiStent cuts 9-month in-stent late lumen loss by ~53% versus zotarolimus-eluting stents.
Why the study?
Does an absorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent reduce in-stent late lumen loss compared to a zotarolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing stent implantation?
Population
184 patients undergoing stent implantation
Comparison
Absorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (APSES) vs Zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES)
Design
RCT, 2:1 randomisation
Follow-up
nine months
Authors
Loading...
May inform stent choice in PCI; leaves open whether lower late loss improves clinical outcomes.
RCT (n=184)
2:1
Yes
Does an absorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent reduce in-stent late lumen loss compared to a zotarolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing stent implantation?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.27% vs 0.58%
p-value: p=<0.001
The absorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent demonstrated superior efficacy in reducing nine-month late lumen loss compared to a zotarolimus-eluting stent, with comparable safety.
Wijns et al. (2015) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease (n=184). MiStent absorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (APSES) vs. Zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) was evaluated on In-stent late lumen loss (LLL) (p=<0.001). The MiStent absorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent demonstrated superiority over a zotarolimus-eluting stent for 9-month mean in-stent late lumen loss (0.27 vs 0.58 mm; p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: