CONTEXT: Approval of drug-eluting coronary stents was based on results of relatively small trials of selected patients; however, in routine practice, stents are used in a broader spectrum of patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare the first 2 commercially available drug-eluting stents-sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting-for prevention of symptom-driven clinical end points, using a study design reflecting everyday clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized, blinded trial conducted August 2004 to January 2006 at 5 university hospitals in Denmark. Patients were 2098 men and women (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [10.8] years) treated withpercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and randomized to receive either sirolimus-eluting (n = 1065) or paclitaxel-eluting (n = 1033) stents. Indications for PCI included ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI or unstable angina pectoris, and stable angina. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was a composite clinical end point of major adverse cardiac events, defined as either cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel revascularization. Secondary end points included individual components of the composite end point, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis. RESULTS: The sirolimus- and the paclitaxel-eluting stent groups did not differ significantly in major adverse cardiac events (98 [9.3%] vs 114 [11.2%]; hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.08]; P = .16) or in any of the secondary end points. The stent thrombosis rates were 27 (2.5%) and 30 (2.9%) (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.46]; P = .60), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this practical randomized trial, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients receiving sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00388934.
RCT Entities:
CONTEXT: Approval of drug-eluting coronary stents was based on results of relatively small trials of selected patients; however, in routine practice, stents are used in a broader spectrum of patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare the first 2 commercially available drug-eluting stents-sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting-for prevention of symptom-driven clinical end points, using a study design reflecting everyday clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized, blinded trial conducted August 2004 to January 2006 at 5 university hospitals in Denmark. Patients were 2098 men and women (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [10.8] years) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and randomized to receive either sirolimus-eluting (n = 1065) or paclitaxel-eluting (n = 1033) stents. Indications for PCI included ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI or unstable angina pectoris, and stable angina. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was a composite clinical end point of major adverse cardiac events, defined as either cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel revascularization. Secondary end points included individual components of the composite end point, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis. RESULTS: The sirolimus- and the paclitaxel-eluting stent groups did not differ significantly in major adverse cardiac events (98 [9.3%] vs 114 [11.2%]; hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.08]; P = .16) or in any of the secondary end points. The stent thrombosis rates were 27 (2.5%) and 30 (2.9%) (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.46]; P = .60), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this practical randomized trial, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients receiving sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00388934.
Authors: M W Z Basalus; K Tandjung; K G van Houwelingen; M G Stoel; F H A F de Man; J W Louwerenburg; S A M Saïd; G C M Linssen; M A W J Kleijne; J van der Palen; J Huisman; P M J Verhorst; C von Birgelen Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Sergio Leonardi; Paul W Armstrong; Phillip J Schulte; E Magnus Ohman; L Kristin Newby Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 29.983