Biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer-coated stent versus durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT V): a randomised non-inferiority trial

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Dr Evald Hø ; j Christiansen ; PhD^a ; ^{evald.christiansen@dadlnet.dk} ; Lisette Okkels Jensen ; DMSci^b ; Per Thayssen ; DMSci^b ; Hans-Henrik Tilsted ; MD^c ; Lars Romer Krusell ; MD^a ; Knud Nø ; rregaard Hansen ; MD^b ; Anne Kaltoft ; PhD^a ; Michael Maeng ; PhD^a ; Prof Steen Dalby Kristensen ; DMSci^a ; Prof Hans Erik Bø ; tker ; DMSci^a ; Christian Juhl Terkelsen ; DMSci^a ; Anton Boel Villadsen ; MD^c ; Jan Ravkilde ; DMSci^c ; Jens Aarø ; e ; MD^c ; Morten Madsen ; MSc^d ; Leif Thuesen ; DMSci^a ; Jens Flensted Lassen ; PhD^a ; for the Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT) V investigators
• 刊名：The Lancet
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：23 February-1 March, 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：381
• 期：9867
• 页码：661-669
• 全文大小：322 K

文摘

| Figures/TablesFigures/Tables | ReferencesReferences

Summary

Background

Third-generation biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents might reduce the risk of stent thrombosis compared with first-generation permanent polymer drug-eluting stents. We aimed to further investigate the effects of a biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent compared with a durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in a population-based setting.

Methods

This randomised, multicentre, all-comer, non-inferiority trial was undertaken at three sites across western Denmark. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, and at least one coronary artery lesion (>50 % diameter stenosis). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) using an independently managed computer-generated allocation sequence to receive either a biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer stent (Nobori, Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) or a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent (Cypher Select Plus, Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ, USA). The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularisation) at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin of 0¡¤02). This trial is registered with , number .

Findings

From July, 2009, to January, 2011, we assigned 1229 patients (1532 lesions) to receive the biolimus-eluting stent and 1239 (1555 lesions) to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent. One patient was lost to follow-up because of emigration. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that 50 (4¡¤1 % ) patients who were assigned the biolimus-eluting stent and 39 (3¡¤1 % ) who were assigned the sirolimus-eluting stent met the primary endpoint (risk difference 0¡¤9 % [upper limit of one-sided 95 % CI 2¡¤1 % ]; p_{non-inferiority}=0¡¤06). Significantly more patients in the biolimus-eluting stent group had definite stent thrombosis at 12 months than did those in the sirolimus-eluting stent group (9 [0¡¤7 % ] vs 2 [0¡¤2 % ], risk difference 0¡¤6 % [95 % CI 0¡¤0-1¡¤1]; p=0¡¤034). Per-protocol analysis showed that 45 (3¡¤8 % ) of 1193 patients who received a biolimus-eluting stent and 39 (3¡¤2 % ) of 1208 who received a sirolimus-eluting stent met the primary endpoint (risk difference 0¡¤5 % [upper limit of one-sided 95 % CI 1¡¤8 % ]; p_{non-inferiority}=0¡¤03).

Interpretation

At 1 year follow-up, the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent did not improve clinical results compared with a first-generation sirolimus-eluting stent. We will need to obtain long-term data before we can make recommendations for the role of this biolimus-eluting stent in routine clinical practice.

Funding

Terumo and Cordis (Johnson & Johnson).