Cheol Hyun Lee, Hee Jeong Lee, Tae-Wan Chung, Seonhwa Lee, Jongmin Hwang, In-Cheol Kim, Yun-Kyeong Cho, Hyuck-Jun Yoon, Seung-Ho Hur, Jin Young Kim, Yun Seok Kim, Woo Sung Jang, Jang Hoon Lee, Woong Kim, Jin Bae Lee, Young Joon Hong, Jung Ho Heo, Bong-Ryeol Lee, Joon-Hyung Doh, Eun-Seok Shin, Bon-Kwon Koo, Chang-Wook Nam
{"title":"Comparison of Thick Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent and Thin Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent in Multi-Vessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.","authors":"Cheol Hyun Lee, Hee Jeong Lee, Tae-Wan Chung, Seonhwa Lee, Jongmin Hwang, In-Cheol Kim, Yun-Kyeong Cho, Hyuck-Jun Yoon, Seung-Ho Hur, Jin Young Kim, Yun Seok Kim, Woo Sung Jang, Jang Hoon Lee, Woong Kim, Jin Bae Lee, Young Joon Hong, Jung Ho Heo, Bong-Ryeol Lee, Joon-Hyung Doh, Eun-Seok Shin, Bon-Kwon Koo, Chang-Wook Nam","doi":"10.4070/kcj.2024.0101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>There are limited randomized studies on patients undergoing multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) comparing the outcomes between stent thickness and polymer types. To compare the clinical outcomes of thick biodegradable polymer-based biolimus A9-eluting stents (BESs) and thin durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZESs) in patients undergoing multi-vessel PCI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 936 patients who underwent multi-vessel coronary artery stenting were randomly assigned to the BES (n=472) or ZES (n=464) groups. The primary endpoint was 2-year major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and any revascularization at the 2-year follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-two (11.2%) of 472 patients in BES group and 50 (10.9%) of the 464 patients in ZES group met the 2-year primary endpoint of MACE (hazard ratio, 1.00; 90% confidence interval, 0.72, 1.38; p=0.994). All-cause death (BES vs. ZES: 2.8% vs. 2.7%, p=0.758), MI (2.1% vs. 2.6%, p=0.483), and repeat revascularization (6.7% vs. 6.9%, p=0.876) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Although there was no significant outcome difference in any subgroup analysis, the technical failure rate leading to the use of other stents was higher in BES than in ZES (3.2% vs. 0.9%, p=0.023).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients who underwent multi-vessel PCI, BES and ZES showed comparable 2-year clinical outcomes. However, BES was not established to demonstrate non-inferiority to ZES in terms of the incidence of the primary endpoint at the 2-year. The technical success rate of the index PCI with the assigned stent was higher for thinner ZES.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01947439.</p>","PeriodicalId":17850,"journal":{"name":"Korean Circulation Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Circulation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2024.0101","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: There are limited randomized studies on patients undergoing multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) comparing the outcomes between stent thickness and polymer types. To compare the clinical outcomes of thick biodegradable polymer-based biolimus A9-eluting stents (BESs) and thin durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZESs) in patients undergoing multi-vessel PCI.
Methods: A total of 936 patients who underwent multi-vessel coronary artery stenting were randomly assigned to the BES (n=472) or ZES (n=464) groups. The primary endpoint was 2-year major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and any revascularization at the 2-year follow-up.
Results: Fifty-two (11.2%) of 472 patients in BES group and 50 (10.9%) of the 464 patients in ZES group met the 2-year primary endpoint of MACE (hazard ratio, 1.00; 90% confidence interval, 0.72, 1.38; p=0.994). All-cause death (BES vs. ZES: 2.8% vs. 2.7%, p=0.758), MI (2.1% vs. 2.6%, p=0.483), and repeat revascularization (6.7% vs. 6.9%, p=0.876) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Although there was no significant outcome difference in any subgroup analysis, the technical failure rate leading to the use of other stents was higher in BES than in ZES (3.2% vs. 0.9%, p=0.023).
Conclusions: In patients who underwent multi-vessel PCI, BES and ZES showed comparable 2-year clinical outcomes. However, BES was not established to demonstrate non-inferiority to ZES in terms of the incidence of the primary endpoint at the 2-year. The technical success rate of the index PCI with the assigned stent was higher for thinner ZES.
期刊介绍:
Korean Circulation Journal is the official journal of the Korean Society of Cardiology, the Korean Pediatric Heart Society, the Korean Society of Interventional Cardiology, and the Korean Society of Heart Failure. Abbreviated title is ''Korean Circ J''.
Korean Circulation Journal, established in 1971, is a professional, peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of cardiovascular medicine, including original articles of basic research and clinical findings, review articles, editorials, images in cardiovascular medicine, and letters to the editor. Korean Circulation Journal is published monthly in English and publishes scientific and state-of-the-art clinical articles aimed at improving human health in general and contributing to the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular diseases in particular.
The journal is published on the official website (https://e-kcj.org). It is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE, Web of Science), Scopus, EMBASE, Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS), Google Scholar, KoreaMed, KoreaMed Synapse and KoMCI, and easily available to wide international researchers