Abstract 12022: Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Everolimus-Eluting Stents versus Sirolimus-Eluting Stents: Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of 14 Randomized Control Trials, Focused on Stent Thrombosis
Background: We sought to compare the long-term clinical outcomes between everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) with a meta-analysis method. The long-term clinical outcomes, especially stent thrombosis (ST), after EES versus SES implantation has not been clearly defined among trials directly comparing the 2 types of stents.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. for trials comparing outcomes between EES (Xience V/Promus) and SES (Cypher select/Cypher select plus) in patients with native coronary artery disease using randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. We selected the article reporting the longest follow-up outcomes from each RCT. The outcome measure was all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite ST, and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). ST was further classified as those occurring early (<=30 days), late (30-365 days), or very late (<365 days).
Results: We identified 14 RCT comparing EES and SES including 2 trials reporting the longest follow-up outcomes as a pooled analysis. We analyzed 13,434 randomly assigned patients with the weighted follow-up period of 2.1 years (Follow-up <=1-year: 7 trials, and 3191 patients; >1-year: 7 trials, and 10243 patients). EES as compared to SES was associated with significantly lower risks for overall ST, and early ST (pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.81, P=0.01, and OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.99, P=0.046, respectively), while there was no significant difference in the risk for late ST and very late ST (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.17-1.43, P=0.19, and OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.23-1.85, P=0.43, respectively). EES as compared to SES was also associated with significantly lower risks for TLR (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, P=0.04). There was no significant difference in the risk for all-cause death, and MI between EES and SES. (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78-1.07, P=0.11, and OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75-1.13, P=0.44, respectively).
Conclusions: In the current meta-analysis of 14 RCT directly comparing EES with SES, implantation of EES as compared to SES implantation was associated with significantly lower risk for definite ST and TLR.
Author Disclosures: T. Toyota: None. H. Shiomi: None. T. Morimoto: None. T. Kimura: Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; Advisory board member of Abott Vascular Japan.
- © 2014 by American Heart Association, Inc.