Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Sirolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for the Treatment of Coronary Bifurcations. Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry

  • Young Bin Song
  • , Joo Yong Hahn
  • , Seung Hyuk Choi
  • , Jin Ho Choi
  • , Sang Hoon Lee
  • , Myung Ho Jeong
  • , Hyo Soo Kim
  • , In Whan Seong
  • , Ju Young Yang
  • , Seung Woon Rha
  • , Yangsoo Jang
  • , Jung Han Yoon
  • , Seung Jea Tahk
  • , Ki Bae Seung
  • , Seung Jung Park
  • , Hyeon Cheol Gwon*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for coronary bifurcation lesions. Background: There are limited data regarding comparisons of SES and PES for the treatment of bifurcation lesions. Methods: Patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention for non-left main bifurcation lesions were enrolled from 16 centers in Korea between January 2004 and June 2006. We compared major adverse cardiac events (MACE [cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization]) between the SES and PES groups in patients overall and in 407 patient pairs generated by propensity-score matching. Results: We evaluated 1,033 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with SES and 562 patients treated with PES. The median follow-up duration was 22 months. Treatment with SES was associated with a lower incidence of MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.89, p < 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.97, p = 0.02), but not of cardiac death (HR: 2.77, 95% CI: 0.40 to 18.99, p = 0.62) and cardiac death or myocardial infarction (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.38 to 2.49, p = 0.94). After propensity-score matching, patients with SES still had fewer MACE and target lesion revascularization incidences than did patients with PES (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.91, p = 0.02, and HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.91, p = 0.02, respectively). There was no significant difference in the occurrences of stent thrombosis between the groups (0.7% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.94). Conclusions: In patients with bifurcation lesions, the use of SES resulted in better long-term outcomes than did the use of PES, primarily by decreasing the rate of repeat revascularization. (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry in South Korea [COBIS]; NCT00851526).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1743-1750
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume55
Issue number16
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Apr 20

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by the Korean Society of Interventional Cardiology , Seoul, Korea. Drs. Song and Hahn contributed equally to this work.

Keywords

  • angioplasty
  • bifurcation lesions
  • paclitaxel-eluting stent
  • sirolimus-eluting stent

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Sirolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for the Treatment of Coronary Bifurcations. Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this