Biodegradable Polymer Versus Polymer-Free Ultrathin Sirolimus-Eluting Stents: Analysis of the Stent Arm Registry From the HOST-IDEA Randomized Trial.

IF 6.1 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-24 DOI:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013585
Jung-Kyu Han, Seokhun Yang, Doyeon Hwang, Sang-Hyeon Park, Jeehoon Kang, Han-Mo Yang, Kyung Woo Park, Hyun-Jae Kang, Bon-Kwon Koo, Jin-Man Cho, Janghyun Cho, Duk Won Bang, Jae-Hwan Lee, Han Cheol Lee, Kyung-Jin Kim, Woo Jung Chun, Won-Woo Seo, Woo-Jung Park, Sang Min Park, Jin Won Kim, Hyo-Soo Kim
{"title":"Biodegradable Polymer Versus Polymer-Free Ultrathin Sirolimus-Eluting Stents: Analysis of the Stent Arm Registry From the HOST-IDEA Randomized Trial.","authors":"Jung-Kyu Han, Seokhun Yang, Doyeon Hwang, Sang-Hyeon Park, Jeehoon Kang, Han-Mo Yang, Kyung Woo Park, Hyun-Jae Kang, Bon-Kwon Koo, Jin-Man Cho, Janghyun Cho, Duk Won Bang, Jae-Hwan Lee, Han Cheol Lee, Kyung-Jin Kim, Woo Jung Chun, Won-Woo Seo, Woo-Jung Park, Sang Min Park, Jin Won Kim, Hyo-Soo Kim","doi":"10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The efficacy and safety of each third-generation drug-eluting stent with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology remain unclear. We investigated the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using the Coroflex ISAR polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) or Orsiro biodegradable polymer SES.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The HOST-IDEA trial (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Coronary Intervention With Next-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Platforms and Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), initially designed with a 2×2 factorial approach, sought to randomize patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention based on dual antiplatelet therapy duration (3 versus 12 months) and stent type (Coroflex ISAR versus Orsiro). Despite randomizing 2013 patients for dual antiplatelet therapy duration, the stent arm transitioned to a registry format during the trial. Among these, 328 individuals (16.3%) were randomized for Coroflex ISAR or Orsiro SES, while 1685 (83.7%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention without stent-type randomization. In this study, the Coroflex ISAR (n=559) and Orsiro groups (n=1449) were matched using a propensity score. The prespecified primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline patient and procedural characteristics were well balanced between the Coroflex ISAR and Orsiro groups after propensity score matching (n=559, each group). The Coroflex ISAR group was significantly associated with a higher rate of target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, compared with the Orsiro group (3.4% versus 1.1%; hazard ratio, 3.21 [95% CI, 1.28-8.05]; <i>P</i>=0.01). A higher risk of target lesion failure in the Coroflex ISAR group was consistently observed across various subgroups. The rates of any bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.51-1.40]; <i>P</i>=0.52) and major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.61-4.08]; <i>P</i>=0.34) were comparable between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this propensity score-matched analysis of the stent arm registry from the HOST-IDEA trial, the Orsiro SES was associated with significantly better outcomes in terms of 1-year target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, than the Coroflex ISAR SES.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02601157.</p>","PeriodicalId":10330,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013585","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The efficacy and safety of each third-generation drug-eluting stent with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology remain unclear. We investigated the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using the Coroflex ISAR polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) or Orsiro biodegradable polymer SES.

Methods: The HOST-IDEA trial (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Coronary Intervention With Next-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Platforms and Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), initially designed with a 2×2 factorial approach, sought to randomize patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention based on dual antiplatelet therapy duration (3 versus 12 months) and stent type (Coroflex ISAR versus Orsiro). Despite randomizing 2013 patients for dual antiplatelet therapy duration, the stent arm transitioned to a registry format during the trial. Among these, 328 individuals (16.3%) were randomized for Coroflex ISAR or Orsiro SES, while 1685 (83.7%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention without stent-type randomization. In this study, the Coroflex ISAR (n=559) and Orsiro groups (n=1449) were matched using a propensity score. The prespecified primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months.

Results: The baseline patient and procedural characteristics were well balanced between the Coroflex ISAR and Orsiro groups after propensity score matching (n=559, each group). The Coroflex ISAR group was significantly associated with a higher rate of target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, compared with the Orsiro group (3.4% versus 1.1%; hazard ratio, 3.21 [95% CI, 1.28-8.05]; P=0.01). A higher risk of target lesion failure in the Coroflex ISAR group was consistently observed across various subgroups. The rates of any bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.51-1.40]; P=0.52) and major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.61-4.08]; P=0.34) were comparable between the 2 groups.

Conclusions: In this propensity score-matched analysis of the stent arm registry from the HOST-IDEA trial, the Orsiro SES was associated with significantly better outcomes in terms of 1-year target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, than the Coroflex ISAR SES.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02601157.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
可降解聚合物与无聚合物超薄西罗莫司洗脱支架:来自 HOST-IDEA 随机试验的支架臂登记分析。
背景:采用超薄支架和先进聚合物技术的第三代药物洗脱支架的疗效和安全性仍不明确。我们研究了使用 Coroflex ISAR 不含聚合物的西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)或 Orsiro 生物可降解聚合物 SES 进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的临床效果:HOST-IDEA试验(协调冠状动脉狭窄治疗的最佳策略--使用新一代药物洗脱支架平台和简短双联抗血小板疗法进行冠状动脉介入治疗)最初采用2×2因子法设计,旨在根据双联抗血小板疗法的持续时间(3个月与12个月)和支架类型(Coroflex ISAR与Orsiro)对接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者进行随机分组。尽管根据双重抗血小板治疗持续时间随机抽取了 2013 名患者,但在试验期间,支架治疗组过渡到了登记模式。其中,328 人(16.3%)随机接受了 Coroflex ISAR 或 Orsiro SES 治疗,1685 人(83.7%)接受了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,未进行支架类型随机化。在这项研究中,Coroflex ISAR 组(559 人)和 Orsiro 组(1449 人)采用倾向评分进行匹配。预设的主要终点是靶病变失败,即12个月时心脏死亡、靶血管心肌梗死和临床驱动的靶病变血运重建的综合结果:经过倾向评分匹配后,Coroflex ISAR 组和 Orsiro 组的患者基线和手术特征非常均衡(每组 559 人)。与 Orsiro 组相比,Coroflex ISAR 组的靶病变失败率明显更高,主要是由临床驱动的靶病变血运重建引起的(3.4% 对 1.1%;危险比为 3.21 [95% CI,1.28-8.05];P=0.01)。在不同的亚组中,均观察到 Coroflex ISAR 组靶病变失败的风险较高。两组的任何出血率(危险比,0.85 [95% CI,0.51-1.40];P=0.52)和大出血率(危险比,1.58 [95% CI,0.61-4.08];P=0.34)相当:结论:在这项对HOST-IDEA试验支架臂登记进行的倾向评分匹配分析中,Orsiro SES与Coroflex ISAR SES相比,在1年靶病变失败(主要由临床驱动的靶病变血运重建引起)方面的预后明显更好:URL:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov;唯一标识符:NCT02601157。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
1.80%
发文量
221
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, an American Heart Association journal, focuses on interventional techniques pertaining to coronary artery disease, structural heart disease, and vascular disease, with priority placed on original research and on randomized trials and large registry studies. In addition, pharmacological, diagnostic, and pathophysiological aspects of interventional cardiology are given special attention in this online-only journal.
期刊最新文献
Stroke Prevention With Prophylactic Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Cardiac Surgery Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Propensity-Score Studies. Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: The Evidence Is Mounting. Microvascular Resistance Reserve Predicts Myocardial Ischemia and Response to Therapy in Patients With Angina and Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries. Enhancing Guidewire Efficacy for Trans-radial Access: The EAGER Randomized Controlled Trial. Correction to: Consensus Statement on the Management of Nonthrombotic Iliac Vein Lesions From the VIVA Foundation, the American Venous Forum, and the American Vein and Lymphatic Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1