Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction

Hyun Jong Lee, Taek Kyu Park, Young Bin Song, Young Jin Choi, Cheol Woong Yu, Jeong Hoon Yang, Joo Yong Hahn, Seung Hyuk Choi, Rak Kyeong Choi, Jin Ho Choi, Jin Sik Park, Je Sang Kim, Tae Hoon Kim, Ho Joon Jang, Sang Hoon Lee, Won Heum Shim, Young Moo Roh, Hyeon Cheol Gwon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Abstract Background There are limited data about long-term outcomes for biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to compare the two-year efficacy and safety of BES versus EES in AMI patients. Methods A total of 707 consecutive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent PCI with BES (n = 171) or EES (n = 536) between July 2008 and June 2012 were enrolled in this study. The efficacy endpoint (target vessel failure; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) and the safety endpoint (a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis) at two years were compared in crude and propensity score-matched cohorts. Results After two years, target vessel failure occurred in 13 patients treated with BES and 49 patients treated with EES (7.6% versus 9.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-2.04; p = 0.78). The rates of composite safety endpoint at two years were not different between two groups (BES 7.6% versus EES 10.8%; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47-1.62; p = 0.66). The rates of stent thrombosis did not differ between two groups (BES 0.6% versus EES 1.3%; adjusted HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.06-6.20; p = 0.69). These findings were substantiated by similar results in the propensity score-matched cohort. Conclusions In the treatment of patients with AMI, BES showed similar efficacy and safety compared to those of EES for up to two years.

Original languageEnglish
Article number19597
Pages (from-to)190-197
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Journal of Cardiology
Volume183
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Jan 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Stents
Polymers
Myocardial Infarction
Safety
Propensity Score
Everolimus
Confidence Intervals
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Thrombosis
Cause of Death

Keywords

  • Biolimus-eluting stent
  • Drug-eluting stent
  • Everolimus-eluting stent
  • Myocardial infarction
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction. / Lee, Hyun Jong; Park, Taek Kyu; Song, Young Bin; Choi, Young Jin; Yu, Cheol Woong; Yang, Jeong Hoon; Hahn, Joo Yong; Choi, Seung Hyuk; Choi, Rak Kyeong; Choi, Jin Ho; Park, Jin Sik; Kim, Je Sang; Kim, Tae Hoon; Jang, Ho Joon; Lee, Sang Hoon; Shim, Won Heum; Roh, Young Moo; Gwon, Hyeon Cheol.

In: International Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 183, 19597, 01.01.2015, p. 190-197.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lee, HJ, Park, TK, Song, YB, Choi, YJ, Yu, CW, Yang, JH, Hahn, JY, Choi, SH, Choi, RK, Choi, JH, Park, JS, Kim, JS, Kim, TH, Jang, HJ, Lee, SH, Shim, WH, Roh, YM & Gwon, HC 2015, 'Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction', International Journal of Cardiology, vol. 183, 19597, pp. 190-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.036
Lee, Hyun Jong ; Park, Taek Kyu ; Song, Young Bin ; Choi, Young Jin ; Yu, Cheol Woong ; Yang, Jeong Hoon ; Hahn, Joo Yong ; Choi, Seung Hyuk ; Choi, Rak Kyeong ; Choi, Jin Ho ; Park, Jin Sik ; Kim, Je Sang ; Kim, Tae Hoon ; Jang, Ho Joon ; Lee, Sang Hoon ; Shim, Won Heum ; Roh, Young Moo ; Gwon, Hyeon Cheol. / Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction. In: International Journal of Cardiology. 2015 ; Vol. 183. pp. 190-197.
@article{53eed97ea5ab4ad0bbb2a9ebf7316e6c,
title = "Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction",
abstract = "Abstract Background There are limited data about long-term outcomes for biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to compare the two-year efficacy and safety of BES versus EES in AMI patients. Methods A total of 707 consecutive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent PCI with BES (n = 171) or EES (n = 536) between July 2008 and June 2012 were enrolled in this study. The efficacy endpoint (target vessel failure; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) and the safety endpoint (a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis) at two years were compared in crude and propensity score-matched cohorts. Results After two years, target vessel failure occurred in 13 patients treated with BES and 49 patients treated with EES (7.6{\%} versus 9.1{\%}; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 0.58-2.04; p = 0.78). The rates of composite safety endpoint at two years were not different between two groups (BES 7.6{\%} versus EES 10.8{\%}; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95{\%} CI, 0.47-1.62; p = 0.66). The rates of stent thrombosis did not differ between two groups (BES 0.6{\%} versus EES 1.3{\%}; adjusted HR, 0.63; 95{\%} CI, 0.06-6.20; p = 0.69). These findings were substantiated by similar results in the propensity score-matched cohort. Conclusions In the treatment of patients with AMI, BES showed similar efficacy and safety compared to those of EES for up to two years.",
keywords = "Biolimus-eluting stent, Drug-eluting stent, Everolimus-eluting stent, Myocardial infarction, Percutaneous coronary intervention",
author = "Lee, {Hyun Jong} and Park, {Taek Kyu} and Song, {Young Bin} and Choi, {Young Jin} and Yu, {Cheol Woong} and Yang, {Jeong Hoon} and Hahn, {Joo Yong} and Choi, {Seung Hyuk} and Choi, {Rak Kyeong} and Choi, {Jin Ho} and Park, {Jin Sik} and Kim, {Je Sang} and Kim, {Tae Hoon} and Jang, {Ho Joon} and Lee, {Sang Hoon} and Shim, {Won Heum} and Roh, {Young Moo} and Gwon, {Hyeon Cheol}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.036",
language = "English",
volume = "183",
pages = "190--197",
journal = "International Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0167-5273",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction

AU - Lee, Hyun Jong

AU - Park, Taek Kyu

AU - Song, Young Bin

AU - Choi, Young Jin

AU - Yu, Cheol Woong

AU - Yang, Jeong Hoon

AU - Hahn, Joo Yong

AU - Choi, Seung Hyuk

AU - Choi, Rak Kyeong

AU - Choi, Jin Ho

AU - Park, Jin Sik

AU - Kim, Je Sang

AU - Kim, Tae Hoon

AU - Jang, Ho Joon

AU - Lee, Sang Hoon

AU - Shim, Won Heum

AU - Roh, Young Moo

AU - Gwon, Hyeon Cheol

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Abstract Background There are limited data about long-term outcomes for biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to compare the two-year efficacy and safety of BES versus EES in AMI patients. Methods A total of 707 consecutive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent PCI with BES (n = 171) or EES (n = 536) between July 2008 and June 2012 were enrolled in this study. The efficacy endpoint (target vessel failure; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) and the safety endpoint (a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis) at two years were compared in crude and propensity score-matched cohorts. Results After two years, target vessel failure occurred in 13 patients treated with BES and 49 patients treated with EES (7.6% versus 9.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-2.04; p = 0.78). The rates of composite safety endpoint at two years were not different between two groups (BES 7.6% versus EES 10.8%; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47-1.62; p = 0.66). The rates of stent thrombosis did not differ between two groups (BES 0.6% versus EES 1.3%; adjusted HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.06-6.20; p = 0.69). These findings were substantiated by similar results in the propensity score-matched cohort. Conclusions In the treatment of patients with AMI, BES showed similar efficacy and safety compared to those of EES for up to two years.

AB - Abstract Background There are limited data about long-term outcomes for biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to compare the two-year efficacy and safety of BES versus EES in AMI patients. Methods A total of 707 consecutive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent PCI with BES (n = 171) or EES (n = 536) between July 2008 and June 2012 were enrolled in this study. The efficacy endpoint (target vessel failure; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) and the safety endpoint (a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis) at two years were compared in crude and propensity score-matched cohorts. Results After two years, target vessel failure occurred in 13 patients treated with BES and 49 patients treated with EES (7.6% versus 9.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-2.04; p = 0.78). The rates of composite safety endpoint at two years were not different between two groups (BES 7.6% versus EES 10.8%; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47-1.62; p = 0.66). The rates of stent thrombosis did not differ between two groups (BES 0.6% versus EES 1.3%; adjusted HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.06-6.20; p = 0.69). These findings were substantiated by similar results in the propensity score-matched cohort. Conclusions In the treatment of patients with AMI, BES showed similar efficacy and safety compared to those of EES for up to two years.

KW - Biolimus-eluting stent

KW - Drug-eluting stent

KW - Everolimus-eluting stent

KW - Myocardial infarction

KW - Percutaneous coronary intervention

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926662609&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926662609&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.036

DO - 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.036

M3 - Article

C2 - 25668147

AN - SCOPUS:84926662609

VL - 183

SP - 190

EP - 197

JO - International Journal of Cardiology

JF - International Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0167-5273

M1 - 19597

ER -