Related trials
SORT-OUT-3, 2010 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
SPIRIT IV, 2010 - everolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
RESOLUTE All comers, 2010 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs everolimus eluting stent
ISAR-DESIRE-2, 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
BASKET-PROVE (EES), 2010 - everolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
GISSOC II, 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
BASKET-PROVE (SES), 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
STICH (ventricular reconstruction), 2009 - CABG+surgical ventricular reconstruction vs CABG
ISAR TEST 2 (vs ZES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol eluting stent vs zotarolimus eluting stent
SYNTAX, 2009 - paclitaxel eluting stent vs CABG
ISAR-LEFT-MAIN, 2009 - sirolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
COMPARE, 2009 - everolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
ISAR TEST 3 (PF), 2009 - polymer free sirolimus stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
PASEO, 2009 - drug-eluting stents vs bare-metal stent
ZEST AMI (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
ISAR TEST 2 (vs SES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
BARI 2D, 2009 - CABG or PCI vs medical treatment
ISAR-TEST-4 (biodegradable polymer), 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer vs sirolimus eluting stent
ISAR TEST 3 (BP), 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer vs sirolimus eluting stent
ENDEAVOR IV, 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
GENIUS-STEMI, 2009 - Genous stent vs bare-metal stent
ZEST (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
ZEST AMI (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
Thiele, 2009 - sirolimus ES vs MIDCAB
ZEST (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
See also:
All coronary artery disease clinical trials
All stable angina clinical trials
All clinical trials of myocardial revascularization
All clinical trials of sirolimus eluting stent
|
|
Treatments
Studied treatment |
coated Bx Velocity
|
Control treatment |
Bx Velocity
|
Concomittant treatment |
Clopidogrel or ticlopidine 8 weeks |
Treatments description |
|
Patients
Patients |
Stable or unstable AP, silent ischaemia; single primary target lesion in a native coronary artery |
Baseline characteristics |
age |
62 |
diabetes (%) |
19% |
lesion length (mm) |
9.6 (3.3) |
%QCA follow-up |
89 |
QCA follow-up duration |
6 |
reference-vessel diameter |
2.60 (0.54) |
lesion length inclusion criteria |
<18 |
Lesion diameter inclusion criteria |
2.5-3.5 |
Female (%) |
37% |
|
Method and design
Randomized effectives |
120 / 118 (studied vs. control) |
Design |
Parallel groups |
Blinding |
double-blind |
Follow-up duration |
12 months |
Number of centre |
19 |
Geographic area |
Global |
Primary endpoint |
Late lumen loss |
Results
Endpoint
Studied treat. n/N
Control treat. n/N
Graph
RR [95% CI]
MACE
7 / 120
35 / 118
0,20 [0,09;0,43]
All cause death
2 / 120
2 / 118
classic
0,98 [0,14;6,87]
MI (fatal and non fatal)
4 / 120
5 / 118
classic
0,79 [0,22;2,86]
CABG
1 / 120
1 / 118
classic
0,98 [0,06;15,54]
target lesion revascularisation
0 / 120
27 / 118
0,01 [0,00;0,46]
angiographic restenosis
NA / 120
NA / 118
late stent thrombosis (31days - 1year)
0 / 120
0 / 118
classic
0,98 [0,00;249,91]
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
0 / 120
0 / 118
classic
0,98 [0,00;249,91]
0
2
1.0
Relative risks
|
Endpoint |
Events (%) |
Relative Risk |
95% CI |
Endpoint definition in the trial |
Ref |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
MACE
|
7 / 120 (5,8%) |
35 / 118 (29,7%) |
0,20 |
[0,09;0,43] |
|
|
All cause death
|
2 / 120 (1,7%) |
2 / 118 (1,7%) |
0,98 |
[0,14;6,87] |
|
|
MI (fatal and non fatal)
|
4 / 120 (3,3%) |
5 / 118 (4,2%) |
0,79 |
[0,22;2,86] |
|
|
CABG
|
1 / 120 (0,8%) |
1 / 118 (0,8%) |
0,98 |
[0,06;15,54] |
|
|
target lesion revascularisation
|
0 / 120 (0,4%) |
27 / 118 (22,9%) |
0,02 |
[0,00;0,30] |
|
|
angiographic restenosis
|
0 / 120 (0,4%) |
31 / 118 (26,3%) |
0,02 |
[0,00;0,26] |
|
|
late stent thrombosis (31days - 1year)
|
0 / 120 (0,4%) |
0 / 118 (0,4%) |
0,98 |
[0,02;49,15] |
|
3831 |
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
|
0 / 120 (0,4%) |
0 / 118 (0,4%) |
0,98 |
[0,02;49,15] |
|
|
The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
|
Reference(s) used for data extraction:
3831: Moreno R, Fernandez C, Hernandez R, Alfonso F, Angiolillo DJ, Sabate M, Escaned J, Banuelos C, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Macaya CDrug-eluting stent thrombosis: results from a pooled analysis including 10 randomized studies.J Am Coll Cardiol 2005 Mar 15;45:954-9
0:
|
Endpoint |
studied treat. |
control treat. |
mean diff |
Absolute risk reduction
|
Endpoint |
Events rate |
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
MACE |
5,83% |
29,66% |
-238,3‰
|
All cause death |
1,67% |
1,69% |
-0,3‰
|
MI (fatal and non fatal) |
3,33% |
4,24% |
-9,0‰
|
CABG |
8,33‰ |
8,47‰ |
-0,1‰
|
Meta-analysis of all similar trials:
Drug eluting stent in coronary artery disease for all type of patients
Drug eluting stent in coronary artery disease for unparticular patients
myocardial revascularization in coronary artery disease for all type of patient
myocardial revascularization in stable angina for all type of patient
Reference(s)
-
Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, Fajadet J, Ban Hayashi E, Perin M, Colombo A, Schuler G, Barragan P, Guagliumi G, Molnr F, Falotico R.
A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization..
N Engl J Med 2002;346:1773-80
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
-
Morice MC, Serruys PW, Barragan P, Bode C, Van Es GA, Stoll HP, Snead D, Mauri L, Cutlip DE, Sousa E.
Long-term clinical outcomes with sirolimus-eluting coronary stents: five-year results of the RAVEL trial..
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007 Oct 2;50:1299-304
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
|