TY - JOUR
T1 - Three-year patient-related and stent-related outcomes of second-generation everolimus-eluting xience v stents versus zotarolimus-eluting resolute stents in real-world practice (from the Multicenter Prospective EXCELLENT and RESOLUTE-Korea Registries)
AU - Lee, Joo Myung
AU - Park, Kyung Woo
AU - Han, Jung Kyu
AU - Yang, Han Mo
AU - Kang, Hyun Jae
AU - Koo, Bon Kwon
AU - Bae, Jang Whan
AU - Woo, Sung Il
AU - Park, Jin Sik
AU - Jin, Dong Kyu
AU - Jeon, Dong Woon
AU - Oh, Seok Kyu
AU - Park, Jong Seon
AU - Kim, Doo Il
AU - Hyon, Min Su
AU - Jeon, Hui Kyung
AU - Lim, Do Sun
AU - Kim, Myeong Gon
AU - Rha, Seung Woon
AU - Her, Sung Ho
AU - Hwang, Jin Yong
AU - Kim, Sanghyun
AU - Choi, Young Jin
AU - Kang, Jin Ho
AU - Moon, Keon Woong
AU - Jang, Yangsoo
AU - Kim, Hyo Soo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2014/11/1
Y1 - 2014/11/1
N2 - Long-term outcomes are imperative to confirm safety of drug-eluting stents. There have been 2 randomized controlled trials comparing everolimus-eluting stents (EESs) and Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES-Rs). To date, long-term clinical outcomes of these stents were limited to only 1 report, which has recently reported 4-year comparisons of these stents. Therefore, more evidence is needed regarding long-term clinical outcomes of the second-generation stents. This study compared the long-term clinical outcomes of EES with ZES-R in "all-comer" cohorts up to 3-year follow-up. The EXCELLENT and RESOLUTE-Korea registries prospectively enrolled 3,056 patients treated with EES and 1,998 with ZES-R, respectively, without exclusions. Stent-related composite outcomes (target lesion failure) and patient-related composite events up to 3-year follow-up were compared in crude and propensity score-matched analyses. Of 5,054 patients, 3,830 patients (75.8%) had off-label indication (2,217 treated with EES and 1,613 treated with ZES-R). The stent-related outcome (189 [6.2%] vs 127 [6.4%], p = 0.812) and the patient-related outcome (420 [13.7%] vs 250 [12.5%], p = 0.581) did not differ between EES and ZES-R, respectively, at 3 years, which was corroborated by similar results from the propensity score-matched cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 1.20, p = 0.523 and 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02, p = 0.081, for stent- and patient-related outcomes, respectively). The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis up to 3 years (22 [0.7%] vs 10 [0.5%], p = 0.370) was also similar. The rate of very late definite or probable stent thrombosis was very low and comparable between the 2 stents (3 [0.1%] vs 1 [0.1%], p = 0.657). In multivariate analysis, chronic renal failure (adjusted HR 3.615, 95% CI 2.440 to 5.354, p <0.001) and off-label indication (adjusted HR 1.782, 95% CI 1.169 to 2.718, p = 0.007) were the strongest predictors of target lesion failure at 3 years. In conclusion, both stents showed comparable safety and efficacy at 3-year follow-up in this robust real-world registry with unrestricted use of EES and ZES-R. Overall incidences of target lesion failure and definite stent thrombosis, including very late stent thrombosis, were low, even in the patients with off-label indications, suggesting excellent long-term safety and sustained efficacy of both types of second-generation drug-eluting stents.
AB - Long-term outcomes are imperative to confirm safety of drug-eluting stents. There have been 2 randomized controlled trials comparing everolimus-eluting stents (EESs) and Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES-Rs). To date, long-term clinical outcomes of these stents were limited to only 1 report, which has recently reported 4-year comparisons of these stents. Therefore, more evidence is needed regarding long-term clinical outcomes of the second-generation stents. This study compared the long-term clinical outcomes of EES with ZES-R in "all-comer" cohorts up to 3-year follow-up. The EXCELLENT and RESOLUTE-Korea registries prospectively enrolled 3,056 patients treated with EES and 1,998 with ZES-R, respectively, without exclusions. Stent-related composite outcomes (target lesion failure) and patient-related composite events up to 3-year follow-up were compared in crude and propensity score-matched analyses. Of 5,054 patients, 3,830 patients (75.8%) had off-label indication (2,217 treated with EES and 1,613 treated with ZES-R). The stent-related outcome (189 [6.2%] vs 127 [6.4%], p = 0.812) and the patient-related outcome (420 [13.7%] vs 250 [12.5%], p = 0.581) did not differ between EES and ZES-R, respectively, at 3 years, which was corroborated by similar results from the propensity score-matched cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 1.20, p = 0.523 and 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02, p = 0.081, for stent- and patient-related outcomes, respectively). The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis up to 3 years (22 [0.7%] vs 10 [0.5%], p = 0.370) was also similar. The rate of very late definite or probable stent thrombosis was very low and comparable between the 2 stents (3 [0.1%] vs 1 [0.1%], p = 0.657). In multivariate analysis, chronic renal failure (adjusted HR 3.615, 95% CI 2.440 to 5.354, p <0.001) and off-label indication (adjusted HR 1.782, 95% CI 1.169 to 2.718, p = 0.007) were the strongest predictors of target lesion failure at 3 years. In conclusion, both stents showed comparable safety and efficacy at 3-year follow-up in this robust real-world registry with unrestricted use of EES and ZES-R. Overall incidences of target lesion failure and definite stent thrombosis, including very late stent thrombosis, were low, even in the patients with off-label indications, suggesting excellent long-term safety and sustained efficacy of both types of second-generation drug-eluting stents.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84908069051
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.07.065
DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.07.065
M3 - Article
C2 - 25217457
AN - SCOPUS:84908069051
SN - 0002-9149
VL - 114
SP - 1329
EP - 1338
JO - American Journal of Cardiology
JF - American Journal of Cardiology
IS - 9
ER -