Ultrathin Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents

• Published in: JACC. Cardiovascular interventions Vol. 15; no. 18; pp. 1852 - 1860
• Main Authors: Kandzari, David E., Koolen, Jacques J., Doros, Gheorghe, Garcia-Garcia, Hector M., Bennett, Johan, Roguin, Ariel, Gharib, Elie G., Cutlip, Donald E., Waksman, Ron
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Inc 26-09-2022
• Subjects: bioresorbable polymer; percutaneous coronary intervention; ultrathin strut drug-eluting stent(s); ST; percutaneous coronary intervention; bioresorbable polymer; DES; BP SES; TLR; MI; ultrathin strut drug-eluting stent(s); TV MI; CMH; DP EES; TLF
• ISSN: 1936-8798; 1876-7605
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.07.027

Randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority of ultrathin strut drug-eluting stents compared with alternative stent designs. Whether these differences persist over late-term follow-up is uncertain.
This study sought to compare late-term (5-year) clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin strut (60 µm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin strut (81 µm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES).
BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects with Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) was an international, 2:1 randomized trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin strut BP SES versus thin strut DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF). Prespecified outcomes through 5 years were assessed.
Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 5-year rates of TLF were 12.3% for BP SES and 15.3% for DP EES (P = 0.108). Revascularization with BP SES was associated with a significantly lower target vessel–related myocardial infarction (6.6% vs 10.3%, P = 0.015) and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.3% vs 1.6%, P = 0.021). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization was numerically but not significantly lower with BP SES (5.9% vs 7.7%, P = 0.202). Cardiac death rates were 2.6% versus 1.9% (P = 0.495) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively.
In a large, randomized trial, TLF and the individual outcomes of cardiac death and target lesion revascularization at 5 years were similar among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. Both target vessel–related myocardial infarction and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis were significantly lower with BP SES. These results confirm the durability of safety and the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin BP SES.
[Display omitted]