Zotarolimus-eluting Resolute Integrity versus everolimus-eluting Xience Xpedition stents in the management of very long (>30mm) de novo coronary artery stenosis.

BACKGROUND

Procedural and clinical outcomes in patients with very long (>30mm) coronary lesions who underwent stent-based percutaneous coronary interventions are still unfavorable. Therefore, we compared the relative efficacy and safety of resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (R-ZES) and Xpedition everolimus-eluting stents (X-EES) for patients with de novo very long coronary lesions.

METHODS

This comparative single-centre, retrospective study compared long R-ZES and X-EES in consecutive patients admitted with very long (≥30mm) native ACC/AHA type C coronary lesions in 2014. All patients were followed up clinically at 1, 3, 6 and 12months. In this study, only symptom-driven angiogram was advised. The study end point was to evaluate immediate procedural success and one-year rate of target lesion failure (TLF), which is a composite of cardiac death, target lesion myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization (TLR).

RESULTS

Total number of patients enrolled in this study was 185 (R-ZES=107; X-EES=78). The baseline characteristics and post procedural success rate were similar between R-ZES and X-EES groups, including the post stenting lesion lengths (36.6±1.92mm vs 40.71±6.175mm, P=0.09). At 12-month follow-up, there were no significant between-group differences in the rate of adverse clinical events (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and composite outcomes). Procedural success was achieved in 94% in R-ZES group and 93% in X-EES group (P=0.24). The incidence of TLF was 5% in R-ZES and 4% in X-EES groups (HR-1.25; 95% CI-0.86-5.6; P=0.19).

CONCLUSION

Patients with de novo long coronary artery disease, R-ZES implantation showed similar clinical outcome as compared with X-EES implantation.