Key result
Biodegradable polymer stents show similar 3-year target lesion failure rates to durable polymer stents.
Why the study?
Comparisons of the long-term safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer versus durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents are limited.
Does a biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stent reduce target lesion failure compared to a durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in patients eligible for coronary stenting?
RCT (n=2,737)
2:1 ratio
Does a biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stent reduce target lesion failure compared to a durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in patients eligible for coronary stenting?
Absolute Event Rate: 8.9% vs 8.6%
p-value: p=0.81
Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents demonstrate comparable 3-year safety and efficacy to durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents.
Supports either stent choice in coronary interventions; confirms comparable long-term safety and efficacy.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of the novel biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) versus the durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (DP-SES) in the I-LOVE-IT2 trial. BACKGROUNDS: Comparisons of the long-term safety and efficiency of the BP-DES versus the DP-DES are limited. METHODS: A total of 2,737 patients eligible for coronary stenting were randomized to the BP-SES or DP-SES group at a 2:1 ratio. The primary endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF) was defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: A three-year clinical follow-up period was available for 2,663 (97.3%) patients. There were no significant differences in TLF (8.9% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.81), patient-oriented composite endpoint (PoCE) (15.2% vs.14.5%, P = 0.63), or individual components between the BP-SES and DP-SES. Definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) was low and similar at 3 years (0.8% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.64). Landmark analysis of 1-3 years showed that the TLF (2.7% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.81), PoCE (6.2% vs. 5.1%, P = 0.28), and definite/probable ST (0.4% vs. 0.4%, P = 1.00) were comparable between the 2 arms. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective randomized trial, the BP-SES showed similar clinical results versus the DP-SES in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes over a 3-year follow-up period.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease requiring stenting (n=2,737). Biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) vs. Durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (DP-SES) was evaluated on Target lesion failure (TLF) (composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization) (p=0.81). Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents resulted in similar rates of target lesion failure compared to durable polymer stents at 3 years (8.9% vs. 8.6%, P=0.81).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: