Abstract
There have been no optical coherence tomographic (OCT) data directly comparing the pattern of strut coverage between the 2 second-generation drug-eluting stents in the early period. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate early strut coverage using optical coherence tomography 3 months after Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES-R) or everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation in de novo coronary artery lesions. A total of 40 patients who were suitable for the OCT procedure and consented to the study protocol were randomized 1:1 to receive either ZES-R or EES. Among these patients, 35 stented lesions (18 ZES-R, 17 EES) in 34 patients were evaluated by optical coherence tomography immediately and 3 months after stent implantation. Neointimal hyperplasia thickness, percentage of uncovered struts, and the proportion of malapposed struts were measured at 1-mm intervals. An uncovered strut was defined as having a neointimal hyperplasia thickness of 0 μm. At the 3-month OCT evaluation, mean neointimal hyperplasia thickness (ZES-R vs EES 74 ± 41 vs 75 ± 35 μm, p = 0.89) and mean percentage of uncovered struts (ZES-R vs EES 6.2 ± 6.9 vs 4.7 ± 5.1%, p = 0.62) were not significantly different between the groups. The percentage of malapposed struts was also similar between the groups (0.7 ± 2.2% for ZES-R and 0.7 ± 1.7% for EES, p = 0.64). Thrombi were documented in 3 stents (1 [5.6%] in a ZES-R vs 2 [11.8%] in EES, p = 0.60). In conclusion, early stent strut coverage on the basis of serial OCT evaluation was comparable between ZES-R and EES 3 months after stent implantation.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-5 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | American Journal of Cardiology |
| Volume | 111 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 Jan 1 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Cite this
}
Comparison of early strut coverage between zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting stents using optical coherence tomography. / Kim, Seunghwan; Kim, Jung Sun; Shin, Dong Ho; Kim, Byeong Keuk; Ko, Young Guk; Choi, Donghoon; Cho, Yun Kyeong; Nam, Chang Wook; Hur, Seung Ho; Jang, Yangsoo; Hong, Myeongki.
In: American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 111, No. 1, 01.01.2013, p. 1-5.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of early strut coverage between zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting stents using optical coherence tomography
AU - Kim, Seunghwan
AU - Kim, Jung Sun
AU - Shin, Dong Ho
AU - Kim, Byeong Keuk
AU - Ko, Young Guk
AU - Choi, Donghoon
AU - Cho, Yun Kyeong
AU - Nam, Chang Wook
AU - Hur, Seung Ho
AU - Jang, Yangsoo
AU - Hong, Myeongki
PY - 2013/1/1
Y1 - 2013/1/1
N2 - There have been no optical coherence tomographic (OCT) data directly comparing the pattern of strut coverage between the 2 second-generation drug-eluting stents in the early period. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate early strut coverage using optical coherence tomography 3 months after Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES-R) or everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation in de novo coronary artery lesions. A total of 40 patients who were suitable for the OCT procedure and consented to the study protocol were randomized 1:1 to receive either ZES-R or EES. Among these patients, 35 stented lesions (18 ZES-R, 17 EES) in 34 patients were evaluated by optical coherence tomography immediately and 3 months after stent implantation. Neointimal hyperplasia thickness, percentage of uncovered struts, and the proportion of malapposed struts were measured at 1-mm intervals. An uncovered strut was defined as having a neointimal hyperplasia thickness of 0 μm. At the 3-month OCT evaluation, mean neointimal hyperplasia thickness (ZES-R vs EES 74 ± 41 vs 75 ± 35 μm, p = 0.89) and mean percentage of uncovered struts (ZES-R vs EES 6.2 ± 6.9 vs 4.7 ± 5.1%, p = 0.62) were not significantly different between the groups. The percentage of malapposed struts was also similar between the groups (0.7 ± 2.2% for ZES-R and 0.7 ± 1.7% for EES, p = 0.64). Thrombi were documented in 3 stents (1 [5.6%] in a ZES-R vs 2 [11.8%] in EES, p = 0.60). In conclusion, early stent strut coverage on the basis of serial OCT evaluation was comparable between ZES-R and EES 3 months after stent implantation.
AB - There have been no optical coherence tomographic (OCT) data directly comparing the pattern of strut coverage between the 2 second-generation drug-eluting stents in the early period. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate early strut coverage using optical coherence tomography 3 months after Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES-R) or everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation in de novo coronary artery lesions. A total of 40 patients who were suitable for the OCT procedure and consented to the study protocol were randomized 1:1 to receive either ZES-R or EES. Among these patients, 35 stented lesions (18 ZES-R, 17 EES) in 34 patients were evaluated by optical coherence tomography immediately and 3 months after stent implantation. Neointimal hyperplasia thickness, percentage of uncovered struts, and the proportion of malapposed struts were measured at 1-mm intervals. An uncovered strut was defined as having a neointimal hyperplasia thickness of 0 μm. At the 3-month OCT evaluation, mean neointimal hyperplasia thickness (ZES-R vs EES 74 ± 41 vs 75 ± 35 μm, p = 0.89) and mean percentage of uncovered struts (ZES-R vs EES 6.2 ± 6.9 vs 4.7 ± 5.1%, p = 0.62) were not significantly different between the groups. The percentage of malapposed struts was also similar between the groups (0.7 ± 2.2% for ZES-R and 0.7 ± 1.7% for EES, p = 0.64). Thrombi were documented in 3 stents (1 [5.6%] in a ZES-R vs 2 [11.8%] in EES, p = 0.60). In conclusion, early stent strut coverage on the basis of serial OCT evaluation was comparable between ZES-R and EES 3 months after stent implantation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84870975515&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84870975515&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.08.037
DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.08.037
M3 - Article
VL - 111
SP - 1
EP - 5
JO - American Journal of Cardiology
JF - American Journal of Cardiology
SN - 0002-9149
IS - 1
ER -