Outcomes of Patients Treated with the Everolimus- versus the Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in a Consecutive Cohort of Patients at a Tertiary Medical Center

Abstract

In this study, we compare the outcomes of the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) versus the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) treated patients at a tertiary medical center and up to 2 years follow-up. Unselected consecutive patients were retrospectively recruited following stenting with PES (159 patients) or EES (189 patients). The primary endpoint of the study was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the combined endpoint of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary endpoints included target vessel revascularization (TVR), TLR, target vessel failure (TVF), acute stent thrombosis (ST), total death, cardiac death, and nonfatal MI. Patients treated with the PES stent had less congestive heart failure and restenotic lesions, but a higher prevalence of longer lesions, nonleft main bifurcations, required more stents per patient (4.3 ± 2.8 vs. 2.9 ± 2.1). TLF occurred in 32.3% PES versus 21.5% EES (p = 0.027). The secondary unadjusted endpoints for PES versus EES, respectively, were TVF 38.6 versus 30.7% (p = 0.140), TVR 35.7 versus 26.5% (p = 0.079), definite and probable ST 1.2 versus 0.0%, nonfatal MI 4.5 versus 4.2%, and mortality 9.6 versus 4.0%. Logistic regression analysis showed that the numbers of stents per patient (p = 0.001), age (p = 0.01), and renal failure (p = 0.045) were independent predictors of TLF. Using univariate analysis, EES had lower TLF than PES in a cohort of unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at 2 years follow-up. Multivariate analysis showed that the numbers of stents per patient, age, and renal failure, but not stent type, were predictors of TLF.

Keywords

coronary stent - drug-eluting stent - paclitaxel - everolimus - outcome - target lesion revascularization - stent thrombosis

• References

• 1 Grube E, Silber S, Hauptmann KE , et al. TAXUS I: six- and twelve-month results from a randomized, double-blind trial on a slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent for de novo coronary lesions. Circulation 2003; 107 (1) 38-42
• 2 Colombo A, Drzewiecki J, Banning A , et al. TAXUS II Study Group Randomized study to assess the effectiveness of slow- and moderate-release polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent for coronary artery lesions. Circulation 2003; 108 (7) 788-794
• 3 Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA , et al; TAXUS-IV Investigators. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004; 350 (3) 221-231
• 4 Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA , et al; TAXUS-IV Investigators. One-year clinical results with the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent: the TAXUS-IV trial. Circulation 2004; 109 (16) 1942-1947
• 5 Stone GW, Rizvi A, Newman W , et al; SPIRIT IV Investigators. Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2010; 362 (18) 1663-1674
• 6 Kedhi E, Joesoef KS, McFadden E , et al. Second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice (COMPARE): a randomised trial. Lancet 2010; 375 (9710) 201-209
• 7 Alazzoni A, Al-Saleh A, Jolly SS. Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention: meta-analysis of randomized trials. Thrombosis 2012; 2012: 126369
• 8 Stone GW, Kedhi E, Kereiakes DJ , et al. Differential clinical responses to everolimus-eluting and Paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Circulation 2011; 124 (8) 893-900
• 9 Waksman R, Ghali M, Goodroe R , et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents versus everolimus-eluting stents in United States contemporary practice (REWARDS TLX Trial). Am J Cardiol 2012; 110 (8) 1119-1124
• 10 Mahmoudi M, Delhaye C, Wakabayashi K , et al. Outcomes after unrestricted use of everolimus-eluting stent compared to paclitaxel- and sirolimus-eluting stents. Am J Cardiol 2011; 107 (12) 1757-1762
• 11 Applegate RJ, Yaqub M, Hermiller JB , et al. Long-term (three-year) safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting stents compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents (from the SPIRIT III Trial). Am J Cardiol 2011; 107 (6) 833-840
• 12 Food and Drug Administration. Circulatory System Devices Panel Meeting. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/cdrh06.html#circulatory . Accessed February 9, 2007
• 13 Stone GW, Midei M, Newman W , et al; SPIRIT III Investigators. Randomized comparison of everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents: two-year clinical follow-up from the Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients with de novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (SPIRIT) III trial. Circulation 2009; 119 (5) 680-686