Related trials
SORT-OUT-3, 2010 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
BASKET-PROVE (EES), 2010 - everolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
BASKET-PROVE (SES), 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
SPIRIT IV, 2010 - everolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
RESOLUTE All comers, 2010 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs everolimus eluting stent
GISSOC II, 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
STICH (ventricular reconstruction), 2009 - CABG+surgical ventricular reconstruction vs CABG
COMPARE, 2009 - everolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
ZEST (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
ISAR TEST 2 (vs ZES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol eluting stent vs zotarolimus eluting stent
ZEST (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
BARI 2D, 2009 - CABG or PCI vs medical treatment
PASEO, 2009 - drug-eluting stents vs bare-metal stent
SYNTAX, 2009 - paclitaxel eluting stent vs CABG
ISAR-TEST-4 (biodegradable polymer), 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer vs sirolimus eluting stent
ISAR TEST 2 (vs SES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
ISAR TEST 3 (PF), 2009 - polymer free sirolimus stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
GENIUS-STEMI, 2009 - Genous stent vs bare-metal stent
Thiele, 2009 - sirolimus ES vs MIDCAB
ISAR-LEFT-MAIN, 2009 - sirolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
ZEST AMI (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs sirolimus eluting stent
DEBATER (SES vs BMS), 2009 - sirolimus eluting stent vs bare-metal stent
ISAR TEST 3 (BP), 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer vs sirolimus eluting stent
ENDEAVOR IV, 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
ZEST AMI (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent vs paclitaxel eluting stent
See also:
All coronary artery disease clinical trials
All clinical trials of myocardial revascularization
All clinical trials of sirolimus biodegradable polymer
|
|
Treatments
Studied treatment |
biodegradable-polymer 0.4% rapamycin stent (180 mg rapamycin/cm2)
|
Control treatment |
permanent-polymer rapamycin-eluting stent (Cypher) (140 mg rapamycin/cm2)
|
Concomittant treatment |
oral loading dose of 600 mg clopidogrel at least 2 h prior to the intervention, regardless of whether
the patient was taking clopidogrel prior to admission. During
the procedure: intravenous aspirin, heparin or
bivalirudin; glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor usage was at the discretion
of the operators. After the intervention, all patients received
200 mg/day aspirin indefinitely, clopidogrel 150 mg for the first 3
days (or until discharge) followed by 75 mg/day for at least 6 months |
Patients
Patients |
Patients with de novo coronary lesions in native vessels |
Baseline characteristics |
age |
66.1y |
history of MI (%) |
32.9% |
diabetes (%) |
27.4% |
unstable angina (%) |
30.9% |
LAD (%) |
43% |
RCA (%) |
30.3% |
LCx (%) |
26.7% |
lesion length (mm) |
14.3mm |
male (%) |
79.3� |
reference-vessel diameter |
2.75mm |
totally occluded lesions |
7.7% |
bifurcated lesions |
26% |
single vessel patients |
17.4% |
multi vessels patients |
82.6% |
|
Method and design
Randomized effectives |
202 / 202 (studied vs. control) |
Design |
Parallel groups |
Blinding |
open |
Follow-up duration |
12 months |
Number of centre |
2 |
Geographic area |
Germany |
Hypothesis |
Non inferiority |
Primary endpoint |
in-stent late luminal loss |
Results
Endpoint
Studied treat. n/N
Control treat. n/N
Graph
RR [95% CI]
All cause death
4 / 202
4 / 202
classic
1,00 [0,25;3,94]
MI (fatal and non fatal)
3 / 202
4 / 202
classic
0,75 [0,17;3,31]
CABG
1 / 202
3 / 202
classic
0,33 [0,03;3,18]
target-vessel revascularization
12 / 202
16 / 202
0,75 [0,36;1,54]
in-lesion binary restenosis
12 / 202
13 / 202
0,92 [0,43;1,97]
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
2 / 202
4 / 202
classic
0,50 [0,09;2,70]
0
2
1.0
Relative risks
|
Endpoint |
Events (%) |
Relative Risk |
95% CI |
Endpoint definition in the trial |
Ref |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
All cause death
|
4 / 202 (2,0%) |
4 / 202 (2,0%) |
1,00 |
[0,25;3,94] |
|
|
MI (fatal and non fatal)
|
3 / 202 (1,5%) |
4 / 202 (2,0%) |
0,75 |
[0,17;3,31] |
Q and non Q |
|
CABG
|
1 / 202 (0,5%) |
3 / 202 (1,5%) |
0,33 |
[0,03;3,18] |
|
|
target-vessel revascularization
|
12 / 202 (5,9%) |
16 / 202 (7,9%) |
0,75 |
[0,36;1,54] |
|
|
in-lesion binary restenosis
|
12 / 202 (5,9%) |
13 / 202 (6,4%) |
0,92 |
[0,43;1,97] |
in segment |
|
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
|
2 / 202 (1,0%) |
4 / 202 (2,0%) |
0,50 |
[0,09;2,70] |
|
|
The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
|
Reference(s) used for data extraction:
|
Endpoint |
studied treat. |
control treat. |
mean diff |
Absolute risk reduction
|
Endpoint |
Events rate |
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
All cause death |
1,98% |
1,98% |
0,0‰
|
MI (fatal and non fatal) |
1,49% |
1,98% |
-5,0‰
|
CABG |
4,95‰ |
1,49% |
-9,9‰
|
target-vessel revascularization |
5,94% |
7,92% |
-19,8‰
|
in-lesion binary restenosis |
5,94% |
6,44% |
-5,0‰
|
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up) |
9,90‰ |
1,98% |
-9,9‰
|
Meta-analysis of all similar trials:
Drug eluting stent in coronary artery disease for all type of patients
myocardial revascularization in coronary artery disease for all type of patient
Reference(s)
-
Mehilli J, Byrne RA, Wieczorek A, Iijima R, Schulz S, Bruskina O, Pache J, Wessely R, Sch�mig A, Kastrati A.
.
Eur Heart J 2008 Aug;29:1975-82
- 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn253
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
-
Byrne RA, Kufner S, Tiroch K, Massberg S, Laugwitz KL, Birkmeier A, Schulz S, Mehilli J.
Randomised trial of three rapamycin-eluting stents with different coating strategies for the reduction of coronary restenosis: 2-year follow-up results..
Heart 2009;95:1489-94
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
|