Key result
Paclitaxel-eluting stents show no significant difference in major cardiac events versus sirolimus-eluting stents.
Why the study?
Midterm clinical and angiographic outcomes after implantation of paclitaxel- and sirolimus-eluting stents in Japanese patients with complex coronary lesions were not well characterized.
Cohort (n=840)
No
Absolute Event Rate: 0.6% vs 0.12%
p-value: p=0.290
Similar long-term events with paclitaxel- versus sirolimus-eluting stents; leaves open optimal selection pending prospective trials.
OBJECTIVE: We retrospectively analyzed the midterm clinical and angiographic outcomes after the implantation of paclitaxel- (PES, TAXUS Express) and sirolimus- (SES, Cypher Bx Velocity) eluting stents in Japanese patients with complex coronary lesions. METHODS: From August 2004 to May 2009, 1,335 nonrandomized de novo native complex coronary lesions treated with either a PES (357 cases) or SES were included. The inclusion criteria for patients with complex lesions were those with diabetes, those undergoing hemodialysis, and those with a low ejection fraction, as well as subjects who had lesions with severe calcification, ostiums of the right coronary and left circumflex arteries, and who underwent the side-branch bifurcation 2-stent technique. The subjects were evaluated for consistent predictors of cardiac events, binary restenosis and target lesion vascularization of the SES. The composite primary endpoint percentage (900-day cardiac death, nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis) after PES placement was 0.6%, which was not significantly different from that after SES placement (0.12%; p=0.290). The incidence of the secondary endpoint (binary restenosis; stenosis >50% of the diameter at the secondary angiographic examination performed within 550 days after the procedure) after PES placement (15.0%) was also not significantly different than that after SES placement (13.3%; p=0.498). There was no relationship between PES placement and binary restenosis upon angiographic follow-up of 989 lesions (odds ratio of 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.77; p=0.57). CONCLUSION: For de novo native complex coronary stenosis, the midterm safety and efficacy of PES placement was statistically equivalent to that of SES placement in a clinical setting in Japan.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ishikawa et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in de novo native complex coronary lesions (n=840). Paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) vs. Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) was evaluated on 900-day composite of cardiac death, nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis (p=0.290). Paclitaxel-eluting stent placement resulted in a 900-day composite cardiac event rate of 0.6%, which was not significantly different from the 0.12% rate observed with sirolimus-eluting stents (p=0.290).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: