BACKGROUND: Coating of stents has been shown to minimize the interactions between platelets, stent surface and vascular response following stent implantation. The aim of our study was to compare the tacrolimus-eluting carbon-coated JANUS(®) stent with sirolimus-eluting CYPHER(®) stent for the prevention of symptom-driven clinical end points in a real world clinical setting. METHODS: This prospective registry with a follow-up period of 24 months was conducted in 90 consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery stenting receiving CYPHER(®) (n = 48) or JANUS(®) (n = 42) stents. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularisation, and the secondary end point was clinically driven in-stent restenosis. RESULTS: The primary combined endpoint occurred in 38% of patients (n = 16) in the JANUS(®) group compared to 10% (n = 5) in the CYPHER(®) group. The relative risk increase of the composite end point was therefore 63% higher in patients receiving JANUS(®) stents compared to the CYPHER(®) stents (crude HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.17-2.28, p = 0.004; adjusted HR = 1.79, CI = 1.26-2.55, p = 0.001). Interestingly, 75% of events in the JANUS(®) group occurred during the first 6 months after stent implantation. Similarly, the rate of clinically driven in-stent restenosis was higher in patients receiving JANUS(®) stent (n = 10, 2%) compared to the CYPHER(®) stent (n = 2, 4%). Concordantly, the relative risk for clinically driven in-stent restenosis was 81% higher in the JANUS(®) group compared to the CYPHER(®) group (crude HR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.08-3.02, p = 0.02; adjusted HR = 2.24, CI = 1.26-3.96, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: The use of tacrolimus-eluting carbon coated JANUS(®) stent was associated with worse clinical outcome compared to the sirolimus-eluting CYPHER(®) stent in clinical routine use.
BACKGROUND: Coating of stents has been shown to minimize the interactions between platelets, stent surface and vascular response following stent implantation. The aim of our study was to compare the tacrolimus-eluting carbon-coated JANUS(®) stent with sirolimus-eluting CYPHER(®) stent for the prevention of symptom-driven clinical end points in a real world clinical setting. METHODS: This prospective registry with a follow-up period of 24 months was conducted in 90 consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery stenting receiving CYPHER(®) (n = 48) or JANUS(®) (n = 42) stents. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularisation, and the secondary end point was clinically driven in-stent restenosis. RESULTS: The primary combined endpoint occurred in 38% of patients (n = 16) in the JANUS(®) group compared to 10% (n = 5) in the CYPHER(®) group. The relative risk increase of the composite end point was therefore 63% higher in patients receiving JANUS(®) stents compared to the CYPHER(®) stents (crude HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.17-2.28, p = 0.004; adjusted HR = 1.79, CI = 1.26-2.55, p = 0.001). Interestingly, 75% of events in the JANUS(®) group occurred during the first 6 months after stent implantation. Similarly, the rate of clinically driven in-stent restenosis was higher in patients receiving JANUS(®) stent (n = 10, 2%) compared to the CYPHER(®) stent (n = 2, 4%). Concordantly, the relative risk for clinically driven in-stent restenosis was 81% higher in the JANUS(®) group compared to the CYPHER(®) group (crude HR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.08-3.02, p = 0.02; adjusted HR = 2.24, CI = 1.26-3.96, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: The use of tacrolimus-eluting carboncoated JANUS(®) stent was associated with worse clinical outcome compared to the sirolimus-eluting CYPHER(®) stent in clinical routine use.
Authors: Heinrich Wieneke; Thomas Sawitowski; Stephan Wnendt; Alfons Fischer; Olaf Dirsch; Ira Ariadne Karoussos; Raimund Erbel Journal: Herz Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 1.443
Authors: Enrico Romagnoli; Antonio Maria Leone; Francesco Burzotta; Carlo Trani; Giulia Angeloni; Guido Materazzo; Giampaolo Niccoli; Maria De Vita; Matteo Perfetti; Mario Attilio Mazzari; Rocco Mongiardo; Antonio Giuseppe Rebuzzi; Giovanni Schiavoni; Filippo Crea Journal: J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 2.160
Authors: D Antoniucci; R Valenti; A Migliorini; G Moschi; M Trapani; L Bolognese; G M Santoro; G Cerisano Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: D Antoniucci; A Bartorelli; R Valenti; P Montorsi; G M Santoro; F Fabbiocchi; L Bolognese; A Loaldi; M Trapani; D Trabattoni; G Moschi; S Galli Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2000-04-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Klaus Bonaventura; Alexander W Leber; Christian Sohns; Mattias Roser; Leif-Hendrik Boldt; Franz X Kleber; Wilhelm Haverkamp; Marc Dorenkamp Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2012-02-21 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Alexander Sedaghat; Jan-Malte Sinning; Kathrin Paul; Gregor Kirfel; Georg Nickenig; Nikos Werner Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2013-02-10 Impact factor: 5.460