Key result
Sirolimus-eluting stents show no benefit over paclitaxel or zotarolimus stents for 1-year MACE.
Why the study?
There is limited information regarding the angiographic and clinical outcomes among different drug-eluting stents in AMI patients undergoing PCI.
Does a sirolimus-eluting stent improve angiographic and clinical outcomes compared to paclitaxel- or zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing PCI?
Cohort (n=355)
No
Does a sirolimus-eluting stent improve angiographic and clinical outcomes compared to paclitaxel- or zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing PCI?
Absolute Event Rate: 6% vs 7.2%
p-value: p=0.753
In patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing PCI, the superior angiographic results of sirolimus-eluting stents compared to paclitaxel- or zotarolimus-eluting stents do not translate into improved 1-year clinical outcomes.
Outcomes among DES types in AMI PCI appear comparable; leaves open optimal selection pending randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: There is limited information regarding the angiographic and clinical outcomes among the different drug-eluting stents (DESs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total 355 consecutive AMI patients who underwent PCI with a sirolimus- (SES, n=116) or paclitaxel- (PES, n=153) or zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES, n=86) were enrolled. The 6-month angiographic and 1-year clinical outcomes were compared among the 3 groups. At 6 months, there was a trend toward a higher incidence of binary restenosis in the PES group (SES: 8.6%, PES: 19.8%, ZES: 8.3%, P=0.052). Percentage of restenosis was higher in the PES group compared with SES, but was similar to ZES (SES: 18.75 +/-18.16%, PES: 29.32 +/-24.16%, ZES: 23.91 +/-17.03%, P=0.006). Late loss was lower in the SES group compared with PES and ZES (SES: 0.44 +/-0.52, PES: 0.83 +/-0.87, ZES: 0.75 +/-0.63, P<0.001). However, clinical outcomes, including mortality, MI, repeat PCI and major adverse cardiac events, were not different among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The angiographic benefit of SES did not translate into a clinical benefit for up to 1 year in AMI patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choi et al. (2009) conducted a cohort in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=355). Sirolimus-eluting stents vs. Paclitaxel-eluting stents and zotarolimus-eluting stents was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year (p=0.753). Sirolimus-eluting stents improved.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: