• Rainer Zbinden, Raffaele Piccolo, Dik Heg, Marco Roffi, David J Kurz, Olivier Muller, André Vuilliomenet, Stéphane Cook, Daniel Weilenmann, Christoph Kaiser, Peiman Jamshidi, Anna Franzone, Franz Eberli, Peter Jüni, Stephan Windecker, and Thomas Pilgrim.
• Department of Cardiology, Triemlispital, Zurich, Switzerland.
• J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Mar 15; 5 (3): e003255.

BackgroundNo data are available on the long-term performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES). We reported 2-year clinical outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation) trial, which compared BP-SES with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods And ResultsA total of 2119 patients with minimal exclusion criteria were assigned to treatment with BP-SES (n=1063) or DP-EES (n=1056). Follow-up at 2 years was available for 2048 patients (97%). The primary end point was target-lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. At 2 years, target-lesion failure occurred in 107 patients (10.5%) in the BP-SES arm and 107 patients (10.4%) in the DP-EES arm (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.77-1.31, P=0.979). There were no significant differences between BP-SES and DP-EES with respect to cardiac death (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62-1.63, P=0.984), target-vessel myocardial infarction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60-1.39, P=0.669), target-lesion revascularization (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.81-1.71, P=0.403), and definite stent thrombosis (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.56-3.44, P=0.485). There were 2 cases (0.2%) of definite very late stent thrombosis in the BP-SES arm and 4 cases (0.4%) in the DP-EES arm (P=0.423). In the prespecified subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, BP-SES was associated with a lower risk of target-lesion failure compared with DP-EES (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23-0.99, P=0.043, Pinteraction=0.026).ConclusionsComparable safety and efficacy profiles of BP-SES and DP-EES were maintained throughout 2 years of follow-up.Clinical Trial RegistrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.© 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.

45 keywords...

hide…