Thin Strut CoCr biodegradable polymer biolimus A9-eluting stents versus thicker strut stainless steel biodegradable polymer Biolimus A9-eluting stents: Two-year clinical outcomes
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractBackground. While thinner struts are associated with improved clinical outcomes in bare-metal stents (BMS), reducing strut thickness may affect drug delivery from drug-eluting stents (DES) and there are limited data comparing otherwise similar thin and thick strut DES. We assessed 2-year outcomes of patients treated with a thin strut (84-88um) cobalt-chromium, biodegradable polymer, Biolimus A9-eluting stent (CoCr-BP-BES) and compared these to patients treated with a stainless steel, biodegradable polymer, Biolimus A9-eluting stent (SS-BP-BES). Methods. In total, 1257 patients were studied: 400 patients from 12 centres receiving ≥1 CoCr-BP-BES in the prospective Biomatrix Alpha registry underwent prespecified comparison with 857 patients who received ≥1 Biomatrix Flex SS-BP-BES in the LEADERS study (historical control). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE)-cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target vessel revascularization (cd-TVR). Propensity analysis was used to adjust for differences in baseline variables and a landmark analysis at day-3 to account for differences in periprocedural MI definitions. Results. MACE at 2 years occurred in 6.65% CoCr-BP-BES versus 13.23% SS-BP-BES groups (unadjusted HR 0.48 [0.31-0.73]; P = 0.0005). Following propensity analysis, 2-year adjusted MACE rates were 7.4% versus 13.3% (HR 0.53 [0.35-0.79]; P = 0.004). Definite or probable stent thrombosis, adjudicated using identical criteria in both studies, occurred less frequently with CoCr-BP-BES (1.12% vs. 3.22%; adjusted HR 0.32 [0.11-0.9]; P = 0.034). In day-3 landmark analysis, the difference in 2-year MACE was no longer significant but there was a lower patient-orientated composite endpoint (11.7% vs. 18.4%; HR 0.6 [0.43-0.83]; P = 0.006) and a trend to lower target vessel failure (5.8% vs. 9.1%; HR 0.63 [0.4-1.00]; P = 0.078). Conclusion. At 2-year follow-up, propensity-adjusted analysis showed the thin strut (84-88um) Biomatrix Alpha CoCr-BP-BES was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with the thicker strut (114-120um) Biomatrix Flex SSBP- BES.
CitationMenown, I.B.A., Mamas, M.A., Cotton, J.M. et al. (2021) Thin Strut CoCr biodegradable polymer biolimus A9-eluting stents versus thicker strut stainless steel biodegradable polymer Biolimus A9-eluting stents: Two-year clinical outcomes. Journal of Interventional Cardiology, Article ID 6654515, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6654515
JournalJournal of Interventional Cardiology
PubMed ID33880087 (pubmed)
Description© 2021 The Authors. Published by Hindawi. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6654515
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Licence for published version: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
- Thin Strut CoCr Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus A9-Eluting Stents versus Thicker Strut Stainless Steel Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus A9-Eluting Stents: Two-Year Clinical Outcomes.
- Authors: Menown IBA, Mamas MA, Cotton JM, Hildick-Smith D, Eberli FR, Leibundgut G, Tresukosol D, Macaya C, Copt S, Slama SS, Oldroyd KG
- Issue date: 2021
- Improved safety and reduction in stent thrombosis associated with biodegradable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: final 5-year report of the LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) randomized, noninferiority trial.
- Authors: Serruys PW, Farooq V, Kalesan B, de Vries T, Buszman P, Linke A, Ischinger T, Klauss V, Eberli F, Wijns W, Morice MC, Di Mario C, Corti R, Antoni D, Sohn HY, Eerdmans P, Rademaker-Havinga T, van Es GA, Meier B, Jüni P, Windecker S
- Issue date: 2013 Aug
- Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Final 5-Year Report From the COMPARE II Trial (Abluminal Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent).
- Authors: Vlachojannis GJ, Smits PC, Hofma SH, Togni M, Vázquez N, Valdés M, Voudris V, Slagboom T, Goy JJ, den Heijer P, van der Ent M
- Issue date: 2017 Jun 26
- Clinical outcomes with bioabsorbable polymer- versus durable polymer-based drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis.
- Authors: Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, Mariani A, Sabaté M, Smits PC, Kaiser C, D'Ascenzo F, Frati G, Mancone M, Genereux P, Stone GW
- Issue date: 2014 Feb 4