4.6 Article

Improved Late Clinical Safety With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents Compared With Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With De Novo Coronary Lesions 3-Year Follow-Up From the ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) Trial

Journal

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 3, Issue 10, Pages 1043-1050

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.07.008

Keywords

randomized; very late stent thrombosis; zotarolimus

Funding

  1. Abbott
  2. Cordis
  3. Medtronic
  4. Boston Scientific
  5. Eli Lilly
  6. Daiichi-Sankyo
  7. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  8. Sanofi-Aventis
  9. Abbott Vascular

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives The increased frequency of very late (>1 year) stent thrombosis (VLST) has raised concerns with regard to the safety of sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Background Experimental and preliminary clinical findings with the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) have suggested a favorable safety profile. Methods The ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) trial is a single-blind randomized ZES versus PES clinical trial in 1,548 patients with de novo native coronary lesions; the primary end point-9-month target vessel failure was previously reported, annual clinical follow-up is planned for 5 years, and this report describes the 3-year outcomes. Results The ZES compared with PES reduced target vessel failure (12.3% vs. 15.9%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58 to 1.00, p = 0.049), myocardial infarctions (MI) (2.1% vs. 4.9%, HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.80, p = 0.005), and cardiac death plus MI (3.6% vs. 7.1%, HR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82, p = 0.004). Although the overall 3-year rate of Academic Research Consortium definite/probable stent thrombosis did not differ significantly (1.1% vs. 1.7%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.64, p = 0.380), VLST (between 1 and 3 years) was significantly reduced in ZES patients (1 event vs. 11 events; 0.1% vs. 1.6%, HR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.71, p = 0.004). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 3 years was similar with ZES versus PES (6.5% vs. 6.1%, HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.65, p = 0.662). Conclusions Three-year follow-up results from the ENDEAVOR IV trial indicate similar antirestenosis efficacy but improved clinical safety associated with ZES compared with PES, due to significantly fewer pen-procedural and remote MIs associated with fewer VLST events. (A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Medtronic Endeavor Drug [ABT-578] Eluting Coronary Stent System Versus the Taxus Paclitaxel-Eluting Coronary Stent System in De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00217269) (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2010;3:1043-50) (C) 2010 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available