Key result
XIENCE stents in small vessels show no difference in 12-month composite outcomes versus non-small vessels.
Why the study?
Data on outcomes after implantation of everolimus-eluting stents in East Asian patients with small vessel coronary lesions were limited.
Does everolimus-eluting stent implantation for small vessel coronary lesions result in comparable outcomes to non-small vessel lesions in East Asian patients?
Observational (n=1,600)
Yes
Does everolimus-eluting stent implantation for small vessel coronary lesions result in comparable outcomes to non-small vessel lesions in East Asian patients?
Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for small vessel coronary disease showed comparable 12-month clinical outcomes to non-small vessel disease in a real-world Korean cohort.
Comparable outcomes with XIENCE in small vessels; extends real-world East Asian data but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
There are limited data on outcomes after implantation of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in East Asian patients with small vessel coronary lesions. A total of 1,600 patients treated with XIENCE EES (Abbott Vascular, CA, USA) were divided into the small vessel group treated with one ≤2.5 mm stent (n=119) and the non-small vessel group treated with one ≥2.75 mm stent (n=933). The primary end point was a patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and any repeat revascularization at 12 months. The key secondary end point was a device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO), a composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel MI, and target lesion revascularization at 12 months. The small vessel group was more often female, hypertensive, less likely to present with ST-elevation MI, and more often treated for the left circumflex artery, whereas the non-small vessel group more often had type B2/C lesions, underwent intravascular ultrasound, and received unfractionated heparin. In the propensity matched cohort, the mean stent diameter was 2.5±0.0 mm and 3.1±0.4 mm in the small and non-small vessel groups, respectively. Propensity-adjusted POCO at 12 months was 6.0% in the small vessel group and 4.3% in the non-small vessel group (p=0.558). There was no significant difference in DOCO at 12 months (small vessel group: 4.3% and non-small vessel group: 1.7%, p=0.270). Outcomes of XIENCE EES for small vessel disease were comparable to those for non-small vessel disease at 12-month clinical follow-up in real-world Korean patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sim et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease (n=1,600). XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent in small vessels (≤2.5 mm) vs. XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent in non-small vessels (≥2.75 mm) was evaluated on Patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and any repeat revascularization at 12 months (HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.45-4.44, p=0.558). XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent implantation in small coronary vessels resulted in a 12-month patient-oriented composite outcome of 6.0%, which was not significantly different from 4.3% in non-small vessels.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: