Search

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess 2-year safety and efficacy of the current-generation thin composite-wire-strut durable-polymer Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES), compared with the ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in all-comers and a pre-specified small-vessel subgroup analysis. Background The Resolute Onyx ZES is widely used in clinical practice, but no follow-up data beyond 1 year have been published. The randomized BIONYX (Bioresorbable Polymer-Coated Orsiro Versus Durable Polymer-Coated Resolute Onyx Stents) trial (NCT02508714) established the noninferiority of ZES versus SES regarding target vessel failure (TVF) rates. Methods A total of 2,488 all-comer patients were treated at 7 coronary intervention centers in Belgium, Israel, and the Netherlands. The main endpoint, TVF, was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target vessel–related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (clinically indicated target vessel revascularization). Two-year follow-up data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Results Two-year follow-up data were available for 2,460 of 2,488 patients (98.9%). TVF occurred in 93 of 1,243 patients (7.6%) assigned to ZES versus 87 of 1,245 patients (7.1%) assigned to SES (log-rank p = 0.66). There was no significant between-stent difference in individual components of this endpoint. The incidence of definite-or-probable stent thrombosis was low for both treatment arms (0.4% vs. 1.1%; log-rank p = 0.057). In patients stented in small vessels, there was no between-stent difference (TVF 8.2% vs. 8.7% [log-rank p = 0.75], target lesion revascularization 4.0% vs. 4.4% [log-rank p = 0.77]). Conclusions At 2-year follow-up, the novel thin composite-wire-strut durable-polymer Resolute Onyx ZES showed in all-comers similar safety and efficacy compared with the ultrathin cobalt-chromium-strut biodegradable-polymer Orsiro SES. The analysis of patients who were treated in small vessels also suggested no advantage for either stent.

Objectives This study sought to determine clinical outcomes between treatment groups over long-term follow-up. Background The safety and efficacy of a ridaforolimus-eluting stent (RES) was evaluated in the BIONICS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in Coronary Stenosis) and NIREUS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [BioNIR] European Angiography Study) trials, demonstrating noninferiority of RES in comparison with a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) regarding 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) and 6-month angiographic late lumen loss, respectively. Methods Patient-level data from the BIONICS (N = 1,919) and NIREUS (N = 302) randomized trials were pooled, and outcomes in patients implanted with RES and ZES compared. Broad inclusion criteria allowed enrollment of patients with acute coronary syndromes and complex lesions. The primary endpoint was the 2-year rate of TLF or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Results A total of 2,221 patients (age 63.2 ± 10.3 years; 79.7% men) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with RES (n = 1,159) or ZES (n = 1,062) were included. Clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between groups. At 2 years, the primary endpoint of TLF was similar among patients implanted with RES and ZES (7.0% vs. 7.2%; p = 0.94). Rates of target lesion revascularization (4.8% RES vs. 4.1% ZES; p = 0.41) and target vessel–related myocardial infarction (3.1% RES vs. 3.8% ZES; p = 0.52) did not differ between groups. The overall rate of stent thrombosis was also similar (0.5% RES vs. 0.9% ZES; p = 0.39). Conclusions In a pooled analysis of 2 randomized trials, 2-year clinical outcomes were similar between patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with RES and ZES. These results support the long-term safety and efficacy of RES for the treatment of a broad population of patients with coronary artery disease.

Objectives The study sought to evaluate for the first time the 5-year outcomes after treating an all-comers population with newer-generation cobalt chromium-based Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) versus platinum chromium-based PROMUS Element everolimus eluting stents (EES) (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). Background The DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) (DUrable polymer-based sTent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt versus ReSolute integrity: TWENTE II) trial is a randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, investigator-initiated all-comers trial that found at its main analysis similar 1-year safety and efficacy for both drug-eluting stents. It is the first randomized trial ever to investigate the Resolute Integrity ZES and the first trial to compare both devices. Methods In total, 1,811 patients were 1:1 randomized to ZES versus EES. We performed a pre-specified assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes in terms of safety and efficacy. The main endpoint target vessel failure (TVF) is a composite of cardiac death, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Secondary endpoints included the individual components of TVF, and stent thrombosis. The study was independently monitored, and adverse clinical events were independently adjudicated. Results Five-year clinical follow-up data was available in 1,798 (99.3%) patients. The ZES and EES groups showed favorable outcomes, with similar 5-year incidence of TVF (13.2% vs. 14.2%; plog-rank = 0.62) and its individual components: cardiac death (4.5% vs. 4.9%; plog-rank = 0.69), target vessel–related myocardial infarction (3.1% vs. 2.6%; plog-rank = 0.47), and target vessel revascularization (7.6% vs. 8.6%; plog-rank = 0.46). The 5-year incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis was similar (1.5% vs. 1.3%; plog-rank = 0.83). Conclusions At 5-year follow-up, the Resolute Integrity ZES and PROMUS Element EES showed similar and sustained results in terms of safety and efficacy for treating a broad population of all-comers.

The aim of this study was to explore the safety and efficacy of a dedicated drug-eluting stent for the treatment of coronary lesions with very small reference vessel diameter (RVD).Smaller RVD is associated with increased risk for restenosis and target lesion failure (TLF) after stent implantation.This was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter trial of the Resolute Onyx 2.0-mm zotarolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was 12-month TLF, which was compared with a pre-specified performance goal. Subjects with stable or unstable angina or ischemia, target lesions ≤27 mm in length, and RVD ≥2.0 and 2.25 mm were eligible for enrollment. A subset of subjects underwent follow-up angiography at 13 months post-procedure.A total of 101 subjects with 104 lesions were enrolled. The mean age was 67.3 ± 9.6 years, 47% of subjects had diabetes, the mean lesion length was 12.6 ± 6.3 mm, and the mean RVD was 1.91 ± 0.26 mm. The rate of TLF at 12 months was 5.0%, fulfilling the pre-specified performance goal of 19% (p 0.001). The rates of target lesion revascularization and target vessel myocardial infarction were 2.0% and 3.0%, respectively. There were no episodes of stent thrombosis. In-stent late lumen loss was 0.26 ± 0.48 mm, and the rate of binary restenosis was 12.0%.In this first report of a drug-eluting stent with a dedicated size to treat lesions with RVD 2.25 mm, the Resolute Onyx 2.0-mm zotarolimus-eluting stent was associated with a low rate of TLF and late lumen loss, without a signal for stent thrombosis. This novel-sized drug-eluting stent appears to be a feasible option for the treatment of coronary lesions in extremely small vessels. (Medtronic Resolute Onyx 2.0 mm Clinical Study; NCT02412501).

Objectives The authors sought to compare the safety and efficacy of the biocompatible durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent with the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent in unselected coronary patients. Background Biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stents are superior to first-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents in long-term randomized all-comer trials. Long-term data comparing them to second-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents are lacking. Methods The study was a randomized, multicenter, all-comer, noninferiority trial in patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes and at least 1 coronary artery lesion requiring treatment with a drug-eluting stent. Endpoints included major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target lesion) and efficacy (target lesion revascularization); the individual endpoints of MACE; all-cause mortality; any myocardial infarction; target vessel revascularization; and definite or probable stent thrombosis at 36 months. Results From March 2011 to August 2012, 2,999 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either the zotarolimus-eluting (1,502 patients) or the biolimus-eluting (1,497 patients) stent. At 3-year follow-up, MACE occurred in 128 (8.6%) patients assigned to the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent and in 144 (9.6%) assigned to the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent (p = 0.36). Occurrence of cardiac death (2.7% vs. 3.4%), myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target lesion (2.7% vs. 2.5%), and target lesion revascularization (5.4% vs. 5.5%) did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Definite very late stent thrombosis occurred in 6 (0.4%) patients assigned to the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent and in 10 (0.7%) assigned to the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent (p = 0.33). Conclusions At 3-year follow-up, the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent and the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent were similar in clinical outcome, with no significant difference in safety and efficacy outcomes, including stent thrombosis.

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the late clinical performance of a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent compared with a new-generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent. Background It was previously shown that polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents were noninferior to zotarolimus-eluting stents at 12 months. However, long-term follow-up of these devices is critical to evaluate late comparative efficacy. Methods In a clinical trial with minimal exclusion criteria, 3,002 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. Results At 5 years, there was no difference in the incidence of the primary endpoint between sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents and zotarolimus-eluting stents (23.8% vs. 24.2%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.84 to 1.15; p = 0.80). The rates of the individual components of the primary endpoint were also comparable in both groups. The incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis was low in both groups (1.3% vs. 1.6%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.86; 95% confidence interval: 0.46 to 1.62; p = 0.64). The rates of any death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization were similar in both groups. Results were consistent across pre-specified subgroups of age, sex, diabetes, and vessel size. Conclusions Long-term outcomes of patients treated with polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents compared with a new-generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent were similar. Rates of stent thrombosis were low and comparable in both treatment groups, with few events beyond 12 months. (Efficacy Study of Rapamycin- vs. Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents to Reduce Coronary Restenosis [ISAR-TEST-5]; NCT00598533 )

Objectives This study assessed clinical events and patient-reported chest pain 2 years after treatment of all-comers with Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, California) and Promus Element everolimus-eluting stents (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). Background For both drug-eluting stents (DES), no all-comer outcome data from >12 months of follow-up have been published. Although there is increasing interest in patient-reported chest pain following stenting, data with novel DES are scarce. Methods The DUTCH PEERS multicenter trial (TWENTE II) (DUrable Polymer-Based STent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt Versus ReSolute Integrity) Randomized Trial [TWENTE II]) randomized 1,811 all-comer patients to treatment with 1 type of DES. Monitoring and event adjudication were performed by independent contract research organizations. Results The 2-year follow-up of 1,810 patients (99.9%) was available. The primary composite endpoint target vessel failure occurred in 8.6% and 7.8% of patients treated with zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting stents, respectively (p = 0.55). Rates of components of target vessel failure were: cardiac death (2.4% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.42); target vessel–related myocardial infarction (2.4% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.33); clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (4.6% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.83). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, >80% of patients were free from chest pain (no between-stent difference). In addition, >87% of patients were either free from chest pain or experienced pain only at maximal physical exertion, but not during normal daily activities. Patients with chest pain after 12 months at no more than moderate physical effort had a higher risk of target vessel revascularization during the following year (hazard ratio: 1.89 [95% confidence interval: 1.05 to 3.39], p = 0.03). Conclusions During the second year of follow-up, the incidence of adverse clinical endpoints remained similar and low for both DES. The vast majority of patients were free from chest pain

Objectives: This study sought to compare clinical outcomes and angiographic findings using the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) versus the Taxus Libert...

Objectives This study sought to compare the long-term effects of drug-eluting stent (DES) compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Background The randomized DEDICATION (Drug Elution and Distal Protection in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial evaluated the outcome after DES compared with BMS implantation in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods Patients with a high-grade stenosis/occlusion of a native coronary artery presenting with symptoms Results Complete clinical status was available in 623 patients (99.5%) at 5 years follow-up. The combined MACE rate was insignificantly lower in the DES group (16.9% vs. 23%), mainly driven by a lower need of repeat revascularization (p = 0.07). Whereas the number of deaths from all causes tended to be higher in the DES group (16.3% vs. 12.1%, p = 0.17), cardiac mortality was significantly higher (7.7% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.02). The 5-year stent thrombosis rates were generally low and similar between the DES and the BMS groups. No cardiac deaths occurring within 1 month could be clearly ascribed to stent thrombosis, whereas stent thrombosis was involved in 78% of later-occurring deaths. Conclusions The 5-year MACE rate was insignificantly different, but the cardiac mortality was higher after DES versus BMS implantation in patients with STEMI. Stent thrombosis was the main cause of late cardiac deaths.

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate late safety and efficacy outcomes among patients enrolled in clinical trials comparing Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stents (E-ZES) (Medtronic, Inc., Santa Rosa, California) with first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS). Background Despite demonstration of higher angiographic luminal loss and restenosis with E-ZES compared with alternative DES, whether differences in these early angiographic measures translate into more disparate late clinical events is uncertain. Methods Among 3,616 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization in 5 registration trials, late safety and efficacy events were compared between E-ZES (n = 2,132) versus sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents (n = 888) or BMS (n = 596). Results Compared with a parallel cohort of patients treated with first-generation DES and BMS, 5-year rates of cardiac death/myocardial infarction (MI) (5.8% vs. 8.8% DES, p = 0.003; vs. 8.4% BMS, p = 0.02) and major adverse cardiac events (16.1% vs. 20.6% DES, p = 0.009; vs. 24.6% BMS, p Conclusions Over 5 years, significant differences in cardiac death/MI and composite endpoints favored treatment with E-ZES over comparator BMS and DES. Rates of clinical restenosis and safety events, including stent thrombosis beyond the first year of revascularization, remain stable with E-ZES, leading to significant differences compared with first-generation DES.

Objectives We sought to evaluate differences in late safety outcomes relative to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in patients treated with zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). Background Despite treatment recommendations for at least 12 months of DAPT following drug-eluting stent revascularization, device-specific outcomes relative to DAPT duration are absent. Methods Among 2,032 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization with ZES in 5 trials, late safety events were compared relative to DAPT duration for patients with ≥6 months DAPT adherence and survival free of major ischemic and bleeding events. Results A total of 1,414 event-free patients on DAPT at 6 months were identified. Patient group comparisons relative to DAPT included: 6 months versus ≥12 months, and 6 months versus ≥24 months. Through 3 years, risk-adjusted ischemic event rates did not significantly differ between groups: 6 versus ≥12 months: death (2.7% vs. 2.2%), myocardial infarction (MI, 0.3% vs. 1.1%), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST, 0.3% vs. 0%); 6 versus ≥24 months: death (1.6% vs. 1.6%), MI (0.4% vs. 1.2%), and definite/probable ST (0.1% vs. 0.2%). Composite events also did not statistically vary between DAPT durations. In multivariable analysis, 6-month versus longer DAPT duration was not associated with increased likelihood of thrombotic events at 3-year follow-up. Major bleeding was negligible across groups. Conclusions Among patients treated with ZES, late-term events of death, MI, stroke, and ST do not significantly differ between patients taking 6 months DAPT compared with continuation beyond 1 year. These findings merit further study to identify the appropriate duration of DAPT according to specific drug-eluting stents.

Objectives We assessed the in vivo vascular response to a new generation of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) with prolonged drug release (Resolute ZES-SR, Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, California) compared with ZES with faster kinetics (Endeavor ZES-FR, Medtronic Vascular) by optical coherence tomography. Background Local drug release kinetics has been implicated with antirestenosis efficacy of drug-eluting stents. However, the impact of different release kinetics on vascular response of diseased human coronary arteries remains to be investigated. Methods The study population consisted of 43 patients with long lesions in native coronary vessels treated with multiple overlapping ZES. Twenty-one patients treated with ZES-SR were compared with 22 patients treated with ZES-FR from the ODESSA (Optical coherence tomography for DES SAfety) study. The primary endpoint was in-stent neointimal hyperplasia as assessed by optical coherence tomography at 6-month follow-up. Coprimary endpoints were the percentage of uncovered and malapposed struts. Results Strut-level median neointimal thickness was 0.11 mm (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.07 to 0.15 mm) in ZES-SR and 0.31 mm (IQR: 0.27 to 0.42 mm) in ZES-FR, respectively (p Conclusions This study demonstrated the impact of different release kinetics on human in vivo vascular response to ZES implantation. The new generation of ZES-SR compared with ZES-FR had better suppression of the neointimal response but higher proportion of uncovered and malapposed struts at 6-month optical coherence tomography follow-up. (Optical Coherence Tomography in Long Lesions [LongOCT]; NCT01133925 )

Objectives This study sought to compare the efficacy of passive stent coating with titanium-nitride-oxide (TiNO) with drug-eluting stents releasing zotarolimus (ZES) (Endeavor, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota). Background Stent coating with TiNO has been shown to reduce restenosis compared with bare-metal stents in experimental and clinical studies. Methods In an assessor-blind noninferiority study, 302 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to treatment with TiNO or ZES. The primary endpoint was in-stent late loss at 6 to 8 months, and analysis was by intention to treat. Results Both groups were well balanced with respect to baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. The TiNO group failed to reach the pre-specified noninferiority margin for the primary endpoint (in-stent late loss: 0.64 ± 0.61 mm vs. 0.47 ± 0.48 mm, difference: 0.16, upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26; pnoninferiority = 0.54), and subsequent superiority testing was in favor of ZES (psuperiority = 0.02). In-segment binary restenosis was lower with ZES (11.1%) than with TiNO (20.5%; psuperiority = 0.04). A stratified analysis of the primary endpoint found particularly pronounced differences between stents among diabetic versus nondiabetic patients (0.90 ± 0.69 mm vs. 0.39 ± 0.38 mm; pinteraction = 0.04). Clinical outcomes showed a similar rate of death (0.7% vs. 0.7%; p = 1.00), myocardial infarction (5.3% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.60), and major adverse cardiac events (21.1% vs. 18.0%, hazard ratio: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.00; p = 0.50) at 1 year. There were no differences in rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 0%; p = 0.51) at 1 year. Conclusions Compared with TiNO, ZES was superior with regard to late loss and binary restenosis. The concept of passive stent coating with TiNO remains inferior to drug-eluting stent technology in reducing restenosis. ([TIDE] Randomized Trial Comparing Titan Stent With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent: NCT00492908 )

Objectives This study sought to compare late safety and efficacy outcomes following percutaneous coronary revascularization with zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). Background Despite higher late lumen loss and binary restenosis with ZES compared with SES, it is uncertain whether differences in early angiographic measures translate into more disparate late clinical events. Methods Clinical outcomes were prospectively evaluated through 5 years in the ENDEAVOR III (A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Medtronic Endeavor Drug [ABT-578] Eluting Coronary Stent System Versus the Cypher Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) that randomized 436 patients of relatively low anatomic and clinical risk to treatment with ZES (n = 323) or SES (n = 113) and evaluated a primary endpoint of 8-month angiographic late lumen loss. Results At 5 years (completeness of follow-up: 95.2%), pre-specified endpoints of all-cause mortality (5.2% vs. 13.0%, p = 0.02), myocardial infarction (1.0% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.03), and the composite event rates of cardiac death/myocardial infarction (1.3% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.009) and major adverse cardiac events (14.0% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.05) were significantly lower among patients treated with ZES. Rates of target lesion (8.1% ZES vs. 6.5% SES, p = 0.68) and target vessel revascularization were similar between treatment groups. Stent thrombosis was infrequent and similar in both groups (0.7% ZES vs. 0.9% SES, p = 1.0). Between 9 months and 5 years, progression of major adverse cardiac events was significantly more common with SES than with ZES (16.7% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.015). Conclusions Despite initially higher angiographic late lumen loss, rates of clinical restenosis beyond the protocol-specified angiographic follow-up period remain stable with ZES compared with the rates for SES, resulting in similar late-term efficacy. Over 5 years, significant differences in death, myocardial infarction, and composite endpoints favored treatment with ZES. (The Medtronic Endeavor III Drug Eluting Coronary Stent System Clinical Trial [ENDEAVOR III]; NCT00217256 )

Objectives This study assessed the ability of the SYNTAX score (SXscore) to stratify risk in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using zotarolimus-eluting or everolimus-eluting stents. Background The SXscore can identify patients treated with PCI who are at highest risk of adverse events. Methods The SXscore was calculated prospectively in 2,033 of the 2,292 patients enrolled in the RESOLUTE All Comers study (RESOLUTE III All Comers Trial: A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). Clinical outcomes in terms of a patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization; the individual components of POCE; target lesion failure (TLF) (a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel MI, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization); and stent thrombosis were subsequently stratified according to SXscore tertiles: SXscoreLOW ≤9 (n = 698), 9 17 (n = 659). Results At 12-month follow-up, rates of POCE, MI, repeat revascularization, TLF, and the composite of death/MI were all significantly higher in patients in the highest SXscore tercile. Rates of stent thrombosis were all highest in the SXscoreHIGH tertile (p > 0.05). After multivariate adjustment, the SXscore was identified as an independent predictor of POCE, MI, repeat revascularization, and TLF (p Conclusions The SYNTAX score is able to stratify risk amongst an all-comers population treated with PCI with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES); however, improvements can be made with the inclusion of clinical variables. (RESOLUTE III All Comers Trial: A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; NCT00617084)

Objectives The increased frequency of very late (>1 year) stent thrombosis (VLST) has raised concerns with regard to the safety of sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Background Experimental and preliminary clinical findings with the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) have suggested a favorable safety profile. Methods The ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) trial is a single-blind randomized ZES versus PES clinical trial in 1,548 patients with de novo native coronary lesions; the primary end point—9-month target vessel failure—was previously reported, annual clinical follow-up is planned for 5 years, and this report describes the 3-year outcomes. Results The ZES compared with PES reduced target vessel failure (12.3% vs. 15.9%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58 to 1.00, p = 0.049), myocardial infarctions (MI) (2.1% vs. 4.9%, HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.80, p = 0.005), and cardiac death plus MI (3.6% vs. 7.1%, HR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82, p = 0.004). Although the overall 3-year rate of Academic Research Consortium definite/probable stent thrombosis did not differ significantly (1.1% vs. 1.7%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.64, p = 0.380), VLST (between 1 and 3 years) was significantly reduced in ZES patients (1 event vs. 11 events; 0.1% vs. 1.6%, HR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.71, p = 0.004). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 3 years was similar with ZES versus PES (6.5% vs. 6.1%, HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.65, p = 0.662). Conclusions Three-year follow-up results from the ENDEAVOR IV trial indicate similar antirestenosis efficacy but improved clinical safety associated with ZES compared with PES, due to significantly fewer peri-procedural and remote MIs associated with fewer VLST events. (A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Medtronic Endeavor Drug [ABT-578] Eluting Coronary Stent System Versus the Taxus Paclitaxel-Eluting Coronary Stent System in De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00217269 )

Objectives Using optical coherence tomography, we assessed the proportion of uncovered struts at 6-month follow-up in zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), specifically Endeavor (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, California) stents, and identical bare-metal stents (BMS) implanted in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Background Sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents implanted in STEMI have been associated with delayed healing and incomplete strut coverage. ZES are associated with a more complete and uniform strut coverage in stable patients, but whether this holds true also after STEMI is unknown. Methods Forty-four patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI were randomized to ZES or BMS (3:1 randomization). Angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography follow-up was conducted at 6 months and clinical follow-up at 1 year. All images were analyzed by an independent core laboratory that was blind to stent assignments. Results There were no differences between ZES and BMS in percentage of uncovered struts (median: 0.00% [interquartile range (IQR): 0.00% to 1.78%] vs. 1.98% [IQR: 0.21% to 7.33%], p = 0.13), maximum length of uncovered segments (0.00 [IQR: 0.00 to 1.19] mm vs. 1.38 [IQR: 0.65 to 3.30] mm, p = 0.10), percentage of malapposed struts (0.00% [IQR: 0.00% to 0.23%] vs. 0.15% [IQR: 0.00% to 5.81%], p = 0.16), and maximum length of malapposed segments (0.00 [IQR: 0.00 to 0.67] mm vs. 0.33 [IQR: 0.00 to 2.55] mm, p = 0.20). Neointimal response was similar between ZES and BMS (332 [IQR: 240 to 429] μm vs. 186 [IQR: 136 to 348] μm, p = 0.99) and evenly distributed. No late acquired malapposition was observed in both groups. There were no deaths, myocardial infarction, or stent thromboses at 1 year. Conclusions This optical coherence tomography study found no difference in strut coverage and similar vessel response to ZES, when compared with identical BMS, implanted during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI patients. (Six-Month Coverage and Vessel Wall Response of the Zotarolimus Drug-Eluting Stent Implanted in AMI Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography [OCTAMI]; NCT00704561 )

Objectives The E-Five registry was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, California) for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis across a wide range of patients treated in real-world clinical practice settings. Background Early clinical trials with the Endeavor ZES have demonstrated low rates of target lesion revascularization with a favorable safety profile including low late stent thrombosis with up to 4 years of follow-up. A clinical registry was designed to complement controlled trial data by examining a large patient population, including high-risk patient subsets. Methods The E-Five registry is a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter global registry conducted at 188 centers worldwide. Adult patients (n = 8,314) with coronary artery disease who underwent single-vessel or multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention were enrolled. The primary end point was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12 months. A secondary analysis stratified patients by standard versus extended-use clinical and lesion characteristics. Results Overall 12-month outcome rates were MACE 7.5%; cardiac death 1.7%; myocardial infarction (all) 1.6%; target lesion revascularization 4.5%; and stent thrombosis (Academic Research Consortium definite and probable) 1.1%. The 12-month MACE rates were 4.3% and 8.6% for standard- and extended-use patients, respectively (p Conclusions This large, international multicenter registry provides important information regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of the Endeavor ZES across standard and extended-use patients in the real-world setting. Rates of MACE and measures of safety including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis were low and consistent with pooled results of clinical trials. (E-Five Registry: A World-Wide Registry With The Endeavor Zotarolimus Eluting Coronary Stent [eFive Registry]; NCT00623441 )

Objectives We performed this study to investigate the vascular response in early period after zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Endeavor Sprint, Medtronic CardioVascular, Minneapolis, Minnesota) implantation. Background The ZES has different characteristics, with biocompatible polymer and rapid drug-elution, compared with the first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods The ENDEAVOR OCT (Evaluation in 3 Months Duration of Neointimal Coverage after Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation by Optical Coherence Tomography) trial is a prospective, single-center study evaluating vascular healing patterns with optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 3 months after stent implantation. A total of 31 ZES in 30 patients underwent serial OCT at immediate post-intervention and 3 months. Neointimal growth and malapposition were analyzed at each stent strut of cross-sectional OCT images with 0.5-mm intervals. Results The incidence of malapposition at post-intervention and 3 months was 6.0% and 0.2%, respectively. However, late acquired malapposition was not detected at 3 months. Of 31 stents, 27 stents (87.1%) were covered completely with neointima, but the remaining 4 stents had 2 (0.8%), 4 (0.9%), 4 (1.2%), and 6 (1.4%) uncovered struts. Overall mean percentage of covered stent struts was 99.9 ± 0.4%. This finding was consistent among groups with acute coronary syndrome and stable angina pectoris (99.9 ± 0.3% vs. 99.9 ± 0.4%, p = 0.92). Intracoronary thrombus was documented in 1 stent (3.2%) among 31 stents. Conclusions Most of the stent struts were covered with neointima, and late acquired malapposition was not found at 3 months after ZES implantation. Therefore, the current study demonstrated that ZES might have a favorable in vivo vascular response at 3 months after stent implantation. (Evaluation of Zotarolimus Eluting Stent at 3 Months Using Optical Coherence Tomography [ENDEAVOR OCT]; NCT00815139 )

Objectives The aim of this study was to examine outcomes related to the use of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, California) compared with the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) in the 477 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) enrolled in the randomized ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial. Background Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients is associated with increased rates of restenosis-related end points compared with PCI in nondiabetic patients. Although ZES has been associated with similar clinical efficacy compared with PES in the overall trial population of the ENDEAVOR IV trial, whether these results are maintained in the higher-risk restenosis subgroup of patients with DM has not been determined. Methods Clinical and angiographic outcomes were compared according to randomized treatment assignment to either ZES or PES. Results Baseline characteristics were similar among ZES (n = 241) and PES (n = 236) diabetic patients, with slightly longer lesion lengths in PES-treated patients (12.9 mm vs. 14.0 mm, p = 0.041). Among the 86 DM patients assigned to routine angiographic follow-up (18% of the overall DM cohort), in-stent percent diameter stenosis at 8 months was greater among ZES-treated patients (32.9 vs. 21.1, p = 0.023), with a trend toward higher in-stent late loss. One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with either ZES or PES (target vessel failure: 8.6% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.53; target lesion revascularization: 6.9% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.70; target vessel revascularization: 8.6% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.87). There were no significant interactions between DM status and stent type with respect to the outcomes measured, and the relative efficacy/safety of ZES and PES were similar among insulin- and noninsulin-requiring subgroups. Conclusions One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with ZES and PES in the ENDEAVOR IV trial. These findings parallel the overall trial results, which demonstrated similar efficacy and safety of ZES and PES for single de novo coronary lesions.

Objectives The RESOLUTE trial examined the safety and efficacy of a next-generation zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent, Resolute (Medtronic CardioVascular Inc., Santa Rosa, California). Background Revascularization benefits associated with current drug-eluting stents are often diminished in the presence of complex coronary lesions and in certain patient cohorts. Resolute uses a new proprietary polymer coating that extends the duration of drug delivery to match the longer healing duration often experienced in more complex cases. Methods The RESOLUTE trial was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study of the Resolute stent in 139 patients with de novo coronary lesions with reference vessel diameters ≥2.5 and ≤3.5 mm and lesion length ≥14 and ≤27 mm. The primary end point was 9-month in-stent late lumen loss by quantitative coronary angiography. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days, 6, 9, and 12 months; acute device, lesion, and procedure success; and 9-month target vessel failure (TVF), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis, neointimal hyperplastic (NIH) volume, and percent NIH volume obstruction. Results The 9-month in-stent late lumen loss was 0.22 ± 0.27 mm. Cumulative MACE were 4.3%, 4.3%, 7.2%, and 8.7% at 30 days, 6, 9, and 12 months, respectively. Acute lesion, procedure, and device success rates were 100.0%, 95.7%, and 99.3%, respectively. At 9 months, TLR was 0.0%, TVF was 6.5%, stent thrombosis was 0.0%, NIH volume was 6.55 ± 7.83 mm 3 , and percent NIH volume obstruction was 3.73 ± 4.05%. Conclusions In this feasibility study, the Resolute stent demonstrated low in-stent late lumen loss, minimal neointimal hyperplastic ingrowth, low TLR, no stent thrombosis, and acceptable TVF and MACE. (The RESOLUTE Clinical Trial; NCT00248079 )

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the vessel response between zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) using intravascular ultrasound.Background: The ENDE...

Before coronary stents, balloon angioplasty was limited by arterial dissection, acute closure, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), a 5% risk for emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery, the need for repeat procedures to treat restenosis, and sometimes procedural death. Coronary stents

The aim of this registry is to demonstrate whether theimplantation of a Zotarolimus-eluting (ZES) Endeavor™ stent (Medtronic Corp., USA.) into an unprotected left main stem is both safe and efficiently feasible in the long term, in an unselected patient population with significant co-morbidities

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine outcomes related to the use of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, California) compared with the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) in the 477 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) enrolled in the randomized ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial.BackgroundPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients is associated with increased rates of restenosis-related end points compared with PCI in nondiabetic patients. Although ZES has been associated with similar clinical efficacy compared with PES in the overall trial population of the ENDEAVOR IV trial, whether these results are maintained in the higher-risk restenosis subgroup of patients with DM has not been determined.MethodsClinical and angiographic outcomes were compared according to randomized treatment assignment to either ZES or PES.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar among ZES (n = 241) and PES (n = 236) diabetic patients, with slightly longer lesion lengths in PES-treated patients (12.9 mm vs. 14.0 mm, p = 0.041). Among the 86 DM patients assigned to routine angiographic follow-up (18% of the overall DM cohort), in-stent percent diameter stenosis at 8 months was greater among ZES-treated patients (32.9 vs. 21.1, p = 0.023), with a trend toward higher in-stent late loss. One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with either ZES or PES (target vessel failure: 8.6% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.53; target lesion revascularization: 6.9% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.70; target vessel revascularization: 8.6% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.87). There were no significant interactions between DM status and stent type with respect to the outcomes measured, and the relative efficacy/safety of ZES and PES were similar among insulin- and noninsulin-requiring subgroups.ConclusionsOne-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with ZES and PES in the ENDEAVOR IV trial. These findings parallel the overall trial results, which demonstrated similar efficacy and safety of ZES and PES for single de novo coronary lesions.

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare the long-term effects of drug-eluting stent (DES) compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.BackgroundThe randomized DEDICATION (Drug Elution and Distal Protection in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial evaluated the outcome after DES compared with BMS implantation in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.MethodsPatients with a high-grade stenosis/occlusion of a native coronary artery presenting with symptoms

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare late safety and efficacy outcomes following percutaneous coronary revascularization with zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES).BackgroundDespite higher late lumen loss and binary restenosis with ZES compared with SES, it is uncertain whether differences in early angiographic measures translate into more disparate late clinical events.MethodsClinical outcomes were prospectively evaluated through 5 years in the ENDEAVOR III (A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Medtronic Endeavor Drug [ABT-578] Eluting Coronary Stent System Versus the Cypher Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) that randomized 436 patients of relatively low anatomic and clinical risk to treatment with ZES (n = 323) or SES (n = 113) and evaluated a primary endpoint of 8-month angiographic late lumen loss.ResultsAt 5 years (completeness of follow-up: 95.2%), pre-specified endpoints of all-cause mortality (5.2% vs. 13.0%, p = 0.02), myocardial infarction (1.0% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.03), and the composite event rates of cardiac death/myocardial infarction (1.3% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.009) and major adverse cardiac events (14.0% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.05) were significantly lower among patients treated with ZES. Rates of target lesion (8.1% ZES vs. 6.5% SES, p = 0.68) and target vessel revascularization were similar between treatment groups. Stent thrombosis was infrequent and similar in both groups (0.7% ZES vs. 0.9% SES, p = 1.0). Between 9 months and 5 years, progression of major adverse cardiac events was significantly more common with SES than with ZES (16.7% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.015).ConclusionsDespite initially higher angiographic late lumen loss, rates of clinical restenosis beyond the protocol-specified angiographic follow-up period remain stable with ZES compared with the rates for SES, resulting in similar late-term efficacy. Over 5 years, significant differences in death, myocardial infarction, and composite endpoints favored treatment with ZES. (The Medtronic Endeavor III Drug Eluting Coronary Stent System Clinical Trial [ENDEAVOR III]; NCT00217256)

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate late safety and efficacy outcomes among patients enrolled in clinical trials comparing Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stents (E-ZES) (Medtronic, Inc., Santa Rosa, California) with first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS).BackgroundDespite demonstration of higher angiographic luminal loss and restenosis with E-ZES compared with alternative DES, whether differences in these early angiographic measures translate into more disparate late clinical events is uncertain.MethodsAmong 3,616 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization in 5 registration trials, late safety and efficacy events were compared between E-ZES (n = 2,132) versus sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents (n = 888) or BMS (n = 596).ResultsCompared with a parallel cohort of patients treated with first-generation DES and BMS, 5-year rates of cardiac death/myocardial infarction (MI) (5.8% vs. 8.8% DES, p = 0.003; vs. 8.4% BMS, p = 0.02) and major adverse cardiac events (16.1% vs. 20.6% DES, p = 0.009; vs. 24.6% BMS, p < 0.001) were significantly lower with E-ZES. The E-ZES was associated with significantly lower target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared with BMS (7.4% vs. 16.3%, p < 0.001) but similar to comparator DES (7.4% vs. 8.1%, p = 0.63). Despite higher TLR in the first year with E-ZES compared with DES, between 1- and 5-year follow-up, rates of cardiac death/MI, TLR, and definite/probable stent thrombosis were significantly lower with E-ZES.ConclusionsOver 5 years, significant differences in cardiac death/MI and composite endpoints favored treatment with E-ZES over comparator BMS and DES. Rates of clinical restenosis and safety events, including stent thrombosis beyond the first year of revascularization, remain stable with E-ZES, leading to significant differences compared with first-generation DES.

ObjectivesWe performed this study to investigate the vascular response in early period after zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Endeavor Sprint, Medtronic CardioVascular, Minneapolis, Minnesota) implantation.BackgroundThe ZES has different characteristics, with biocompatible polymer and rapid drug-elution, compared with the first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES).MethodsThe ENDEAVOR OCT (Evaluation in 3 Months Duration of Neointimal Coverage after Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation by Optical Coherence Tomography) trial is a prospective, single-center study evaluating vascular healing patterns with optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 3 months after stent implantation. A total of 31 ZES in 30 patients underwent serial OCT at immediate post-intervention and 3 months. Neointimal growth and malapposition were analyzed at each stent strut of cross-sectional OCT images with 0.5-mm intervals.ResultsThe incidence of malapposition at post-intervention and 3 months was 6.0% and 0.2%, respectively. However, late acquired malapposition was not detected at 3 months. Of 31 stents, 27 stents (87.1%) were covered completely with neointima, but the remaining 4 stents had 2 (0.8%), 4 (0.9%), 4 (1.2%), and 6 (1.4%) uncovered struts. Overall mean percentage of covered stent struts was 99.9 ± 0.4%. This finding was consistent among groups with acute coronary syndrome and stable angina pectoris (99.9 ± 0.3% vs. 99.9 ± 0.4%, p = 0.92). Intracoronary thrombus was documented in 1 stent (3.2%) among 31 stents.ConclusionsMost of the stent struts were covered with neointima, and late acquired malapposition was not found at 3 months after ZES implantation. Therefore, the current study demonstrated that ZES might have a favorable in vivo vascular response at 3 months after stent implantation. (Evaluation of Zotarolimus Eluting Stent at 3 Months Using Optical Coherence Tomography [ENDEAVOR OCT]; NCT00815139)

ObjectivesThe RESOLUTE trial examined the safety and efficacy of a next-generation zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent, Resolute (Medtronic CardioVascular Inc., Santa Rosa, California).BackgroundRevascularization benefits associated with current drug-eluting stents are often diminished in the presence of complex coronary lesions and in certain patient cohorts. Resolute uses a new proprietary polymer coating that extends the duration of drug delivery to match the longer healing duration often experienced in more complex cases.MethodsThe RESOLUTE trial was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study of the Resolute stent in 139 patients with de novo coronary lesions with reference vessel diameters ≥2.5 and ≤3.5 mm and lesion length ≥14 and ≤27 mm. The primary end point was 9-month in-stent late lumen loss by quantitative coronary angiography. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days, 6, 9, and 12 months; acute device, lesion, and procedure success; and 9-month target vessel failure (TVF), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis, neointimal hyperplastic (NIH) volume, and percent NIH volume obstruction.ResultsThe 9-month in-stent late lumen loss was 0.22 ± 0.27 mm. Cumulative MACE were 4.3%, 4.3%, 7.2%, and 8.7% at 30 days, 6, 9, and 12 months, respectively. Acute lesion, procedure, and device success rates were 100.0%, 95.7%, and 99.3%, respectively. At 9 months, TLR was 0.0%, TVF was 6.5%, stent thrombosis was 0.0%, NIH volume was 6.55 ± 7.83 mm3, and percent NIH volume obstruction was 3.73 ± 4.05%.ConclusionsIn this feasibility study, the Resolute stent demonstrated low in-stent late lumen loss, minimal neointimal hyperplastic ingrowth, low TLR, no stent thrombosis, and acceptable TVF and MACE. (The RESOLUTE Clinical Trial; NCT00248079)

Objectives This study sought to compare everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) in terms of patient- or stent-related clinical outcomes in an “all-comer” group of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Background DM significantly increases the risk of adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention. The efficacy and safety of second-generation drug-eluting stents, in particular EES versus ZES, in patients with DM have not been extensively evaluated. Methods Patients with DM (1,855 of 5,054 patients, 36.7%) from 2 prospective registries (the EXCELLENT [Efficacy of Xience/Promus Versus Cypher in Reducing Late Loss After Stenting] registry and RESOLUTE-Korea [Registry to Evaluate the Efficacy of Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent]) who were treated with EES (n = 1,149) or ZES (n = 706) were compared. Stent-related outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), and patient-oriented composite events were a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, and any revascularization. Results Despite a higher risk patient profile in the ZES group, both TLF (43 of 1,149 [3.7%] vs. 25 of 706 [3.5%], p = 0.899) and patient-oriented composite events (104 of 1,149 [9.1%] vs. 72 of 706 [10.2%], p = 0.416) were similar between the EES and ZES in patients with DM at 1 year. In those without DM, EES and ZES also showed comparable incidence of TLF (39 of 1,882 [2.1%] vs. 33 of 1,292 [2.6%], p = 0.370) and patient-oriented composite events (119 of 1,882 [6.3%] vs. 81 of 1,292 [6.3%], p = 0.951), which were all significantly lower than in the DM patients. These results were corroborated by similar findings from the propensity score-matched cohort. Upon multivariate analysis, chronic renal failure was the most powerful predictor of TLF in DM patients (hazard ratio: 4.39, 95% confidence interval: 1.91 to 10.09, p Conclusions After unrestricted use of second-generation drug-eluting stents in all-comers receiving percutaneous coronary intervention, both EES and ZES showed comparable clinical outcomes in the patients with DM up to 1 year of follow-up. DM compared with non-DM patients showed significantly worse patient- and stent-related outcomes. Nonetheless, overall incidences of TLF were low, even in the patients with DM, suggesting excellent safety and efficacy of both types of second-generation drug-eluting stents in this high-risk subgroup of patients.

To evaluate safety and effectiveness of the Elixir DESyneTM Novolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System (CSS) compared to the Endeavor Zotarolimus-Eluting CSS through assessment of clinical, angiographic, and IVUS endpoints. 210 patients were randomized 2:1 either to the DESyne CSS loaded with 5mcg per