4.6 Article

The Final 5-Year Follow-Up From the ENDEAVOR IV Trial Comparing a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With a Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent

Journal

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 6, Issue 4, Pages 325-333

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2012.12.123

Keywords

coronary artery disease; paclitaxel-eluting stent; zotarolimus-eluting stent

Funding

  1. Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, California
  2. Medtronic
  3. Cordis
  4. Abbott Vascular
  5. Boston Scientific
  6. Daiichi Sankyo
  7. Eli Lilly
  8. Bristol-Meyers Squibb
  9. Sanofi-Aventis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives This study sought to report the final 5-year outcomes of the ENDEAVOR IV (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) trial comparing the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) with the Taxus paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) in patients with single de novo coronary lesions. Background Primary results of the ENDEAVOR IV trial demonstrated similar clinical outcomes with E-ZES and PES. Concerns with regard to late adverse clinical events with drug-eluting stents highlight the need for long-term follow-up with these devices. Methods Late outcomes after the use of E-ZES and PES were examined in the multicenter randomized ENDEAVOR IV trial in cumulative and landmark analyses. Assessed outcomes were related to device efficacy and patient safety. Results At 5 years, clinical data were available for 722 (93.4%) E-ZES patients and 718 (92.6%) PES patients. Overall rates of target lesion revascularization (7.7% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.70) and target vessel failure were similar (17.2% vs. 21.1%, p = 0.061) with E-ZES compared with PES. The incidence of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) was lower with E-ZES (6.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.048), primarily driven by a lower rate of target vessel MI with E-ZES (2.6% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.002). Although overall definite/probable stent thrombosis rates were similar between stents (1.3% vs. 2%, p = 0.42), rates of very late stent thrombosis (0.4% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.012) and late MI events (1.3% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.008) were significantly lower with E-ZES compared with PES. Conclusions These data demonstrate the durable efficacy and safety of E-ZES compared with PES for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions. Significant improvements in late safety outcomes were observed with E-ZES but should be considered hypothesis-generating, given the limited statistical power of the trial. (The ENDEAVOR IV Clinical Trial: A Trial of a Coronary Stent System in Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00217269) (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2013;6:325-33) (C) 2013 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