TY - JOUR
T1 - Sirolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for the Treatment of Coronary Bifurcations. Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry
AU - Song, Young Bin
AU - Hahn, Joo Yong
AU - Choi, Seung Hyuk
AU - Choi, Jin Ho
AU - Lee, Sang Hoon
AU - Jeong, Myung Ho
AU - Kim, Hyo Soo
AU - Seong, In Whan
AU - Yang, Ju Young
AU - Rha, Seung Woon
AU - Jang, Yangsoo
AU - Yoon, Jung Han
AU - Tahk, Seung Jea
AU - Seung, Ki Bae
AU - Park, Seung Jung
AU - Gwon, Hyeon Cheol
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2010 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2010/4/20
Y1 - 2010/4/20
N2 - Objectives: We aimed to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for coronary bifurcation lesions. Background: There are limited data regarding comparisons of SES and PES for the treatment of bifurcation lesions. Methods: Patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention for non-left main bifurcation lesions were enrolled from 16 centers in Korea between January 2004 and June 2006. We compared major adverse cardiac events (MACE [cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization]) between the SES and PES groups in patients overall and in 407 patient pairs generated by propensity-score matching. Results: We evaluated 1,033 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with SES and 562 patients treated with PES. The median follow-up duration was 22 months. Treatment with SES was associated with a lower incidence of MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.89, p < 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.97, p = 0.02), but not of cardiac death (HR: 2.77, 95% CI: 0.40 to 18.99, p = 0.62) and cardiac death or myocardial infarction (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.38 to 2.49, p = 0.94). After propensity-score matching, patients with SES still had fewer MACE and target lesion revascularization incidences than did patients with PES (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.91, p = 0.02, and HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.91, p = 0.02, respectively). There was no significant difference in the occurrences of stent thrombosis between the groups (0.7% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.94). Conclusions: In patients with bifurcation lesions, the use of SES resulted in better long-term outcomes than did the use of PES, primarily by decreasing the rate of repeat revascularization. (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry in South Korea [COBIS]; NCT00851526).
AB - Objectives: We aimed to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for coronary bifurcation lesions. Background: There are limited data regarding comparisons of SES and PES for the treatment of bifurcation lesions. Methods: Patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention for non-left main bifurcation lesions were enrolled from 16 centers in Korea between January 2004 and June 2006. We compared major adverse cardiac events (MACE [cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization]) between the SES and PES groups in patients overall and in 407 patient pairs generated by propensity-score matching. Results: We evaluated 1,033 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with SES and 562 patients treated with PES. The median follow-up duration was 22 months. Treatment with SES was associated with a lower incidence of MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.89, p < 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.97, p = 0.02), but not of cardiac death (HR: 2.77, 95% CI: 0.40 to 18.99, p = 0.62) and cardiac death or myocardial infarction (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.38 to 2.49, p = 0.94). After propensity-score matching, patients with SES still had fewer MACE and target lesion revascularization incidences than did patients with PES (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.91, p = 0.02, and HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.91, p = 0.02, respectively). There was no significant difference in the occurrences of stent thrombosis between the groups (0.7% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.94). Conclusions: In patients with bifurcation lesions, the use of SES resulted in better long-term outcomes than did the use of PES, primarily by decreasing the rate of repeat revascularization. (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry in South Korea [COBIS]; NCT00851526).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77950581223&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77950581223&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.02.008
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.02.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 20394879
AN - SCOPUS:77950581223
VL - 55
SP - 1743
EP - 1750
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
SN - 0735-1097
IS - 16
ER -