• Alfredo E Rodriguez, Alfredo M Rodriguez-Granillo, David Antoniucci, Juan Mieres, Carlos Fernandez-Pereira, Gaston A Rodriguez-Granillo, Omar Santaera, Bibiana Rubilar, Igor F Palacios, Patrick W Serruys, and ORAR III Investigators.
• Cardiac Unit, Sanatorio Otamendi, Buenos Aires, Argentina. arodriguez@centroceci.com.ar
• Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Sep 1; 80 (3): 385-94.

ObjectivesThe Oral Rapamycin in ARgentina (ORAR) III trial is a randomized study comparing a strategy of oral rapamycin (OR) plus bare-metal stent (BMS) versus a strategy of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with de novo coronary lesions. The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 years cost-effectiveness outcome of each strategy.BackgroundOR after BMS has been associated with reduction of target vessel revascularization (TVR) although its value in long-term efficacy in comparison with DES is unknown.MethodsIn three hospitals in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 200 patients were randomized to OR plus BMS (n = 100) or DES (n = 100). Primary objectives were costs and effectiveness. Cost analysis included in-hospital and follow-up costs. Safety was defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. Efficacy was defined as TVR.ResultsBaseline characteristics between groups were similar. The 3-year follow-up rate was 99%. Cardiac mortality was 2% and 5% in OR group and DES group, respectively (P = 0.44). The composite of death, MI and stroke rate was 11% in OR group and 20% in DES group (P = 0.078). TVR rate was 14.5% in OR group and 17.6% in DES group (P = 0.50), respectively. Three year cumulative costs were significantly lower in the OR arm as compared to the DES arm (P = 0.0001) and DES strategy did not result cost-effective according to the non-inferiority test.ConclusionsAt 3 years follow-up, there were no differences in effectiveness between the two strategies, and DES strategy was not more cost-effective as compared to OR plus BMS.Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

53 keywords...

hide…