DrugLib.com — Drug Information Portal

Rx drug information, pharmaceutical research, clinical trials, news, and more



Second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice (COMPARE): a randomised trial.

Author(s): Kedhi E, Joesoef KS, McFadden E, Wassing J, van Mieghem C, Goedhart D, Smits PC

Affiliation(s): Department of Cardiology, Maasstad Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Publication date & source: 2010-01-16, Lancet., 375(9710):201-9. Epub 2010 Jan 7.

Publication type: Comparative Study; Randomized Controlled Trial; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

BACKGROUND: Everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents, compared with bare metal stents, reduced the risk of restenosis in clinical trials with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. We compared the safety and efficacy of the second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1800 consecutive patients (aged 18-85 years) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at one centre to treatment with everolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety and efficacy (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation) within 12 months. Patients were not told which stent they had been allocated. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01016041. FINDINGS: Follow-up was completed in 1797 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 56 (6%) of 897 patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group versus 82 (9%) of 903 in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group (relative risk 0.69 [95% CI 0.50-0.95], p value for superiority=0.02). The difference was attributable to a lower rate of stent thrombosis (6 [<1%] vs 23 [3%], 0.26 [0.11-0-64], p=0.002), myocardial infarction (25 [3%] vs 48 [5%], 0.52 [0.33-0.84], p=0.007), and target vessel revascularisation (21 [2%] vs 54 [6%], 0.39 [0.24-0.64], p=0.0001). Cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularisation occurred in 44 [5%] patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group versus 74 [8%] patients in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group, p value for superiority was 0.005. INTERPRETATION: The everolimus-eluting stent is better than the second generation paclitaxel-eluting stent in unselected patients in terms of safety and efficacy. On the basis of our results, we suggest that paclitaxel-eluting stents should no longer be used in everyday clinical practice. FUNDING: Unrestricted grants from Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Page last updated: 2010-10-05

-- advertisement -- The American Red Cross
 
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Site usage policy | Privacy policy

All Rights reserved - Copyright DrugLib.com, 2006-2017