Two-year clinical outcomes of zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting durable-polymer-coated stents versus biolimus-eluting biodegradable-polymer-coated stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction with dyslipidemia after percutaneous coronary intervention: data from the KAMIR.

There are limited data comparing the clinical outcomes among new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with dyslipidemia after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We thought to investigate 2-year clinical outcomes among durable-polymer (DP)-coated stents [zotarolimus eluting (ZES) and everolimus eluting (EES)] and biodegradable-polymer (BP)-coated biolimus-eluting stent (BES) in dyslipidemic AMI patients after PCI. Finally, a total 2403 enrolled patients were divided into ZES (n = 953), EES (n = 1145) or BES (n = 305) group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as total death (TD), cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR) and non-TVR. The secondary endpoint was the incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). The 2-year adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of MACE for ZES vs. EES [HR, 1.066; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.752-1.511; p = 0.720], ZES vs. BES (HR 0.933; 95% CI 0.565-1.541; p = 0.786), EES vs. BES (HR 1.876; 95% CI 0.535-1.436; p = 0.600) and ZES/EES vs. BES (HR 0.929; 95% CI 0.591-1.462; p = 0.751) was similar. The cumulative incidences of ST were comparable (ZES vs. EES vs. BES = 1.1% vs. 0.9% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.675) and adjusted HR was not different. In addition, the 2-year adjusted HR of TD, CD, MI, TLR, TVR, and non-TVR was similar. The AMI patients with dyslipidemia receiving ZES, EES, or BES after PCI showed comparable safety and efficacy during 2-year follow-up periods. Therefore, DP-DES or BP-DES is equally acceptable in dyslipidemic AMI patients during PCI.