TY  - BOOK
AU  - Badr, Salem
AU  - Barbash, Israel M
AU  - Chen, Fang
AU  - Dvir, Danny
AU  - Kent, Kenneth M
AU  - Kitabata, Hironori
AU  - Loh, Joshua P
AU  - Minha, Sa'ar
AU  - Pendyala, Lakshmana K
AU  - Pichard, Augusto D
AU  - Sardi, Gabriel L
AU  - Satler, Lowell F
AU  - Suddath, William O
AU  - Torguson, Rebecca
AU  - Waksman, Ron
TI  - Comparison of long-term outcomes between  everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in small  vessels
SN  - 0002-9149
PY  - 2013///
KW  - *Coronary Artery Disease/dt [Drug Therapy]
KW  - *Drug-Eluting Stents
KW  - *Immunosuppressive Agents/ad [Administration &  Dosage]
KW  - *Sirolimus/aa [Analogs & Derivatives]
KW  - *Sirolimus/ad [Administration & Dosage]
KW  - Coronary Angiography
KW  - Coronary Artery Disease/mo [Mortality]
KW  - Endpoint Determination
KW  - Female
KW  - Humans
KW  - Incidence
KW  - Male
KW  - Middle Aged
KW  - Proportional Hazards Models
KW  - Registries
KW  - Retrospective Studies
KW  - Survival Rate
KW  - Treatment Outcome
KW  - Ultrasonography, Interventional
KW  - MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute
KW  - Comparative Study
KW  - Journal Article
N1  - Available online from MWHC library: 1995 -  present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 -  2006
N2  - Although second-generation everolimus-eluting  stents (EESs) have demonstrated superiority over  first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents for a broad  subset of patients and lesions, it is unclear whether the  same applies to sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs). The present  study compared the long-term clinical outcomes between EESs  and SESs in patients with small coronary artery disease. A  cohort of 643 patients treated with EESs (220 patients with  245 lesions) or SESs (423 patients with 523 lesions) in  small vessel lesions (defined as those receiving stents  <=2.5 mm) were retrospectively analyzed. The end points  included target lesion revascularization, target vessel  revascularization, major adverse cardiovascular events  (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion  revascularization), and definite stent thrombosis at 1 year  of follow-up. The baseline characteristics were generally  similar between the 2 groups, except that more systemic  hypertension was seen in the EES group and more patients had  a family history of coronary artery disease in the SES  group. The 1-year target lesion revascularization (5.6% vs  4.8%, p = 0.68) and target vessel revascularization (5.6% vs  7.6%, p = 0.33) rates showed no significant differences  between the EES and SES groups. Overall major adverse  cardiovascular events occurred in 9.1% of the EES- and 8.6%  of SES-treated patients (p = 0.83). This similar major  adverse cardiovascular events rate remained after  adjustment. The rate of stent thrombosis was 0% in the EES  group and 1.2% in the SES group (p = 0.17). In conclusion,  EESs demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes to those of  SESs in small vessel interventions. The absence of stent  thrombosis among patients treated with EESs suggests a good  safety profile for this second-generation drug-eluting  stent, which should be carefully studied in a larger series  of patients with small vessel disease. Copyright  2013  Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.12.015
ER  -