Clinical outcomes of everolimus- and zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction for small coronary artery disease

Title
Clinical outcomes of everolimus- and zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction for small coronary artery disease
Author(s)
김영조조상철[조상철]정명호[정명호]김원[김원]안영균[안영균]홍영준[홍영준]김종진[김종진]조명찬[조명찬]한규록[한규록]김효수[김효수]
Keywords
RANDOMIZED-TRIALS; SPIRIT III; ANGIOGRAPHIC OUTCOMES; COMERS TRIAL; END-POINTS; FOLLOW-UP; PACLITAXEL; LESIONS; REVASCULARIZATION; IMPLANTATION
Issue Date
201406
Publisher
ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
Citation
JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, v.63, no.5-6, pp.409 - 417
Abstract
Background and purpose: There were limited data about comparison of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with small coronary artery disease (CAD), especially in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of ZES and EES in patients with AMI for small CAD. Methods and subjects: A total 1565 AMI patients treated with Endeavor-ZES (n= 651) (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) or Xience V/Promus-EES (n = 914) (Abbott Vascular, Temecula, CA/Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA) for small CAD (stent diameter <= 2.75 mm) in KAMIR (Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry) were enrolled. After propensity score matching to adjust for baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics, we compared a total 1302 patients (651 ZES and 651 EES) about major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1-year. Subgroup analysis about 1-year clinical outcomes was undertaken in patients who were discharged alive. Results: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the two groups after propensity score matching. Total MACE did not differ between the two groups before (9.8% vs. 8.2%, p = 0.265) and after (9.8% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.778) propensity score matching. The EES group showed lower rate of 1-year cardiac death (5.4% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.041), target lesion failure (TLF; 6.9% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.022), and stent thrombosis (1.4% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.042) compared with the ZES group. However, there were no differences in 1-year cardiac death, TLF, and stent thrombosis in propensity score matched populations. Other various 1-year clinical outcomes showed no difference between the two groups. Subgroup analysis in patients who were discharged alive showed similar outcomes between the two groups at 1-year followup. Conclusion: In-this propensity score matched analysis, EES and ZES showed no significant difference in clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up in patients with AMI for small CAD. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Japanese College of Cardiology.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/YU.REPOSITORY/31896http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2013.10.016
ISSN
0914-5087
Appears in Collections:
의과대학 > 내과학교실 > Articles
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE