Background: There is limited data comparing the Xience everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with the BioMatrix biolimus-eluting stent (BES). Methods: This open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial enrolled all-comer patients to be randomly treated with either BES, EES, or ZES in a 1:1:1 ratio in 15 centers across South Korea. The primary end point was a device-oriented composite outcome consisting of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization at 24 months. The BES was compared with the EES and the ZES by intention-to-treat analyses with a noninferiority margin of 3.8%, respectively. Results: Because of slow recruitment and low event rates, this trial was prematurely terminated after enrollment of 1935 (75%) of the intended 2580 patients. Of the 1911 patients randomized to either EES (n=638), BES (n=634), or ZES (n =639), the rate of device-oriented composite outcome was 3.6%, 2.2%, and 3.9%, respectively, at 24 months (BES versus EES: Absolute risk difference-1.4% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% CI:-3.2%]; P for noninferiority <0.001; BES versus ZES: Absolute risk difference-1.7% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% CI:-3.6%]; P for noninferiority <0.001). Conclusions: The BES was noninferior to either the EES or the ZES in all-comer patients for device-oriented composite outcome at the 24-month follow-up. However, caution is advised regarding interpretation of these results due to the premature termination of this study.
|Journal||Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions|
|Publication status||Accepted/In press - 2020|
Bibliographical notePublisher Copyright:
© 2020 American Heart Association, Inc.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine