Two-year clinical outcomes of the NOBORI biolimus-eluting stents versus XIENCE/PROMUS everolimus-eluting stents in small vessel disease.

BACKGROUND

Biolimus-eluting stents (BES) have similar efficacy and safety compared with cobalt chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES), whereas it is unclear whether the same applies to small vessel disease. We sought compare clinical outcomes between BES and CoCr-EES in patients with small vessel disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1,132 patients treated only with BES (612 patients) or EES (520 patients) in small vessel disease (stent size 2.5-mm) were retrospectively analyzed. We assessed the cumulative 2-year incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). The cumulative 2-year incidence of MACE was similar between the two groups (12.1% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.77). The cumulative incidence of cardiac death, CD-TLR, and definite ST were also not significantly different between both groups (3.2% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.78; 8.3% vs. 8.4%, P = 1.00; 0.33% vs. 0.21%, P = 0.66, respectively). After multivariate adjusting, the adjusted risk of BES group relative to CoCr-EES group for MACE was not significantly different (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78, 95% confidential interval [CI]: 0.53-1.15, P = 0.20). Similarly, no significant difference in the adjusted risks for cardiac death and CD-TLR were observed between the two groups (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.28-1.37, P = 0.24; HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.51-1.29, P = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Two-year clinical outcomes of BES are similar to those of CoCr-EES in patients with small vessel disease. The use of BES is acceptable for small coronary artery disease. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.