Department of Interventional Cardiology and Interventional Cardiology Research, Piedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, USA.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 May;4(5):543-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.12.014.
This study sought to compare late safety and efficacy outcomes following percutaneous coronary revascularization with zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES).
Despite higher late lumen loss and binary restenosis with ZES compared with SES, it is uncertain whether differences in early angiographic measures translate into more disparate late clinical events.
Clinical outcomes were prospectively evaluated through 5 years in the ENDEAVOR III (A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Medtronic Endeavor Drug [ABT-578] Eluting Coronary Stent System Versus the Cypher Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) that randomized 436 patients of relatively low anatomic and clinical risk to treatment with ZES (n = 323) or SES (n = 113) and evaluated a primary endpoint of 8-month angiographic late lumen loss.
At 5 years (completeness of follow-up: 95.2%), pre-specified endpoints of all-cause mortality (5.2% vs. 13.0%, p = 0.02), myocardial infarction (1.0% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.03), and the composite event rates of cardiac death/myocardial infarction (1.3% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.009) and major adverse cardiac events (14.0% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.05) were significantly lower among patients treated with ZES. Rates of target lesion (8.1% ZES vs. 6.5% SES, p = 0.68) and target vessel revascularization were similar between treatment groups. Stent thrombosis was infrequent and similar in both groups (0.7% ZES vs. 0.9% SES, p = 1.0). Between 9 months and 5 years, progression of major adverse cardiac events was significantly more common with SES than with ZES (16.7% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.015).
Despite initially higher angiographic late lumen loss, rates of clinical restenosis beyond the protocol-specified angiographic follow-up period remain stable with ZES compared with the rates for SES, resulting in similar late-term efficacy. Over 5 years, significant differences in death, myocardial infarction, and composite endpoints favored treatment with ZES. (The Medtronic Endeavor III Drug Eluting Coronary Stent System Clinical Trial [ENDEAVOR III]; NCT00217256).
本研究旨在比较经皮冠状动脉血运重建术后采用佐他莫司洗脱支架(ZES)和西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)的晚期安全性和疗效。
尽管 ZES 治疗后的晚期管腔丢失和二进制再狭窄发生率高于 SES,但早期血管造影结果的差异是否转化为更不同的晚期临床事件尚不确定。
通过前瞻性评估,ENDEAVOR III 研究(随机对照试验,评估美敦力 Endeavor 药物[ABT-578]洗脱冠状动脉支架系统与 Cypher 西罗莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统在治疗新发病变的原发性冠状动脉病变中的应用)在 5 年内对 436 名解剖学和临床风险相对较低的患者进行了评估,将患者随机分为 ZES(n=323)或 SES(n=113)治疗组,并评估了 8 个月时的主要终点为晚期血管造影管腔丢失。
5 年时(随访完成率:95.2%),所有原因死亡率(5.2% vs. 13.0%,p=0.02)、心肌梗死(1.0% vs. 4.6%,p=0.03)和心脏死亡/心肌梗死的复合事件发生率(1.3% vs. 6.5%,p=0.009)和主要不良心脏事件(14.0% vs. 22.2%,p=0.05)显著降低。与 SES 治疗组相比,靶病变(8.1% ZES vs. 6.5% SES,p=0.68)和靶血管血运重建率相似。两组支架血栓形成均少见且相似(0.7% ZES vs. 0.9% SES,p=1.0)。在 9 个月至 5 年期间,SES 组比 ZES 组发生主要不良心脏事件的进展更为常见(16.7% vs. 7.8%,p=0.015)。
尽管最初的血管造影晚期管腔丢失较高,但 ZES 治疗后的临床再狭窄率在协议规定的血管造影随访期后仍保持稳定,与 SES 治疗后的再狭窄率相似,从而产生相似的晚期疗效。在 5 年期间,死亡率、心肌梗死和复合终点的显著差异有利于 ZES 治疗。(美敦力 Endeavor III 药物洗脱冠状动脉支架系统临床试验[ENDEAVOR III];NCT00217256)。