Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV (SORT OUT IV)

Lisette Okkels Jensen, Per Thayssen, Henrik Steen Hansen, Evald Høj Christiansen, Hans-Henrik Tilsted Hansen, Lars Romer Krusell, Anton Boel Villadsen, Anders Junker, Knud Nørregaard Hansen, Anne Kaltoft, Michael Maeng, Knud Erik Pedersen, Steen Dalby Kristensen, Hans Erik Bøtker, Jan Ravkilde, Richardo Sanchez, Jens Aarøe, Morten Madsen, Henrik Toft Sørensen, Leif ThuesenJens Flensted Lassen, for the Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV (SORT OUT IV) Investigators

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Abstrakt

BACKGROUND: Among drug-eluting stents released to date, the sirolimus-eluting stent has demonstrated the least amount of late lumen loss, but its efficacy and safety have not been compared head-to-head with the next-generation everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome IV (SORT OUT IV) trial was a randomized multicenter, single-blind, all-comer, 2-arm, noninferiority trial comparing the everolimus-eluting stent with the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. The primary end point was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularization) parameters. The noninferiority criterion was a risk difference of 0.015. Intention-to-treat analyses were done at 9- and 18-month follow-ups. A total of 1390 patients were assigned to receive the everolimus-eluting stent and 1384 patients to the sirolimus-eluting stent. At the 9-month follow-up, 68 patients (4.9%) treated with the everolimus-eluting stent compared with 72 patients (5.2%) treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent experienced the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.31; P for noninferiority=0.01). At the 18-month follow-up, this differential remained: 99 patients (7.2%) treated with the everolimus-eluting stent versus 105 (7.6%) treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.23). At the 9-month follow-up, the rate of definite stent thrombosis was higher in the sirolimus-eluting group (2 patients [0.1%] versus 9 patients [0.7%]; hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-1.02). At the 18-month follow-up, this difference was sustained (3 patients [0.2%] versus 12 patients [0.9%]; hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.88). CONCLUSION: The everolimus-eluting stent was found to be noninferior to the sirolimus-eluting stent. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00552877.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftCirculation
Vol/bind125
Udgave nummer10
Sider (fra-til)1246-1255
Antal sider10
ISSN0009-7322
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2012

Fingeraftryk Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV (SORT OUT IV)'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater