Comparison of long-term clinical outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease patients treated either with bioresoarbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent: 5-year results of the CENTURY II randomized clinical trial.
Jiménez, Victor A
CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE
percutaneous coronary intervention, stent
MetadataShow full item record
JournalCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
AbstractObjectives: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of a sirolimus-eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer (BP-SES; Ultimaster), in comparison to a benchmark everolimus-eluting, permanent polymer stent (PP-EES; Xience), in a prespecified subgroup of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) enrolled in the CENTURY II trial. Background: The use of coronary stenting in high-risk subgroups, like MVD patients, is rising. The clinical evidence, including long-term comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety benefits of different new-generation drug eluting stents, however, remains insufficient. Methods: Among 1,119 patients (intention-to-treat) enrolled in the CENTURY II prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicenter trial, a prespecified subgroup of 456 MVD patients were allocated by stratified randomization to treatment with BP-SES (n = 225) or PP-EES (n = 231). The previously reported primary endpoint of this study was freedom from target lesion failure (TLF: a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction [MI] and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization) at 9 months. Results: In this MVD substudy, baseline patient, lesion and procedure characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. At 1 and 5 years, both BP-SES and PP-EES displayed low and comparable rates of TLF (5.3 vs. 7.8%; p = .29 and 10.2 vs. 13.4%; p = .29), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.4 vs. 1.3%; p = .33 and 0.9 vs. 1.7%; p = .43), respectively. Composite endpoint of cardiac death and MI, and patient-oriented composite endpoint of any death, MI, and coronary revascularizations were also similar. Conclusions: These results confirm good long-term safety and efficacy of the studied bioresorbable polymer stent in this high-risk patient population.
- Ten-Year Clinical Outcomes From a Trial of Three Limus-Eluting Stents With Different Polymer Coatings in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.
- Authors: Kufner S, Joner M, Thannheimer A, Hoppmann P, Ibrahim T, Mayer K, Cassese S, Laugwitz KL, Schunkert H, Kastrati A, Byrne RA, ISAR-TEST 4 (Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of 3 Limus-Eluting Stents) Investigators.
- Issue date: 2019 Jan 15
- Ultrathin Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization: 3-Year Outcomes From the Randomized BIOFLOW V Trial.
- Authors: Kandzari DE, Koolen JJ, Doros G, Garcia-Garcia HM, Bennett J, Roguin A, Gharib EG, Cutlip DE, Waksman R, BIOFLOW V Investigators.
- Issue date: 2020 Jun 8
- A randomized comparison of novel bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndromes: The CENTURY II high risk ACS substudy.
- Authors: Jiménez VA, Iñiguez A, Baz JA, Valdés M, Ortiz A, Vuilliomenet A, Mainar V, Dudek D, Banai S, Tüller D, Bonnet JL, De Miguel A, Bastos G, Wijns W, Saito S
- Issue date: 2016 Sep
- Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2-Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial.
- Authors: Zbinden R, Piccolo R, Heg D, Roffi M, Kurz DJ, Muller O, Vuilliomenet A, Cook S, Weilenmann D, Kaiser C, Jamshidi P, Franzone A, Eberli F, Jüni P, Windecker S, Pilgrim T
- Issue date: 2016 Mar 15
- Subgroup Analysis Comparing Ultrathin, Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin, Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients.
- Authors: Roguin A, Kandzari DE, Marcusohn E, Koolen JJ, Doros G, Massaro JM, Garcia-Garcia HM, Bennett J, Gharib EG, Cutlip DE, Waksman R
- Issue date: 2018 Oct