Everolimus-Eluting Xience V/Promus Versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Resolute Stents in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Kyung Woo Park ; MD ; PhD^&lowast ; ; Joo Myung Lee ; MD ; MPH^&lowast ; ; Si-Hyuck Kang ; MD^&lowast ; ; Hyo-Suk Ahn ; MD^&lowast ; ; Hyun-Jae Kang ; MD ; PhD^&lowast ; ; Bon-Kwon Koo ; MD ; PhD^&lowast ; ; Jay Young Rhew ; MD ; PhD^&dagger ; ; Sun Ho Hwang ; MD ; PhD^&Dagger ; ; Sung Yoon Lee ; MD ; PhD^§ ; ; Tae Soo Kang ; MD ; PhD^鈥?/sup> ; Choong Hwan Kwak ; MD ; PhD^¶ ; ; Bum-Kee Hong ; MD ; PhD^# ; Cheol Woong Yu ; MD ; PhD^&lowast ; &lowast ; ; In-Whan Seong ; MD ; PhD^&dagger ; &dagger ; ; Taehoon Ahn ; MD ; PhD^&Dagger ; &Dagger ; ; Han Cheol Lee ; MD ; PhD^§ ; § ; ; Sang Wook Lim ; MD ; PhD^{鈥栤€?/sup>} ; Hyo-Soo Kim ; MD ; PhD^&lowast ; ; ^{hyosoo@snu.ac.kr" class="auth_mail}
• 关键词：diabetes mellitus ; drug-eluting stent ; everolimus ; percutaneous coronary intervention ; zotarolimus
• 刊名：JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
• 出版年：May 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：7
• 期：5
• 页码：471-481
• 全文大小：1235 K

文摘

This study sought to compare everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) in terms of patient- or stent-related clinical outcomes in an “all-comer” group of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background

DM significantly increases the risk of adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention. The efficacy and safety of second-generation drug-eluting stents, in particular EES versus ZES, in patients with DM have not been extensively evaluated.

Methods

Patients with DM (1,855 of 5,054 patients, 36.7%) from 2 prospective registries (the EXCELLENT [Efficacy of Xience/Promus Versus Cypher in Reducing Late Loss After Stenting] registry and RESOLUTE-Korea [Registry to Evaluate the Efficacy of Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent]) who were treated with EES (n = 1,149) or ZES (n = 706) were compared. Stent-related outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), and patient-oriented composite events were a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, and any revascularization.

Results

Despite a higher risk patient profile in the ZES group, both TLF (43 of 1,149 [3.7%] vs. 25 of 706 [3.5%], p = 0.899) and patient-oriented composite events (104 of 1,149 [9.1%] vs. 72 of 706 [10.2%], p = 0.416) were similar between the EES and ZES in patients with DM at 1 year. In those without DM, EES and ZES also showed comparable incidence of TLF (39 of 1,882 [2.1%] vs. 33 of 1,292 [2.6%], p = 0.370) and patient-oriented composite events (119 of 1,882 [6.3%] vs. 81 of 1,292 [6.3%], p = 0.951), which were all significantly lower than in the DM patients. These results were corroborated by similar findings from the propensity score-matched cohort. Upon multivariate analysis, chronic renal failure was the most powerful predictor of TLF in DM patients (hazard ratio: 4.39, 95% confidence interval: 1.91 to 10.09, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

After unrestricted use of second-generation drug-eluting stents in all-comers receiving percutaneous coronary intervention, both EES and ZES showed comparable clinical outcomes in the patients with DM up to 1 year of follow-up. DM compared with non-DM patients showed significantly worse patient- and stent-related outcomes. Nonetheless, overall incidences of TLF were low, even in the patients with DM, suggesting excellent safety and efficacy of both types of second-generation drug-eluting stents in this high-risk subgroup of patients.