The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 353:653-662 August 18, 2005 Number 7
NextNext

Sirolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization
Stephan Windecker, M.D., Andrea Remondino, M.D., Franz R. Eberli, M.D., Peter Jüni, M.D., Lorenz Räber, M.D., Peter Wenaweser, M.D., Mario Togni, M.D., Michael Billinger, M.D., David Tüller, M.D., Christian Seiler, M.D., Marco Roffi, M.D., Roberto Corti, M.D., Gabor Sütsch, M.D., Willibald Maier, M.D., Thomas Lüscher, M.D., Otto M. Hess, M.D., Matthias Egger, M.D., and Bernhard Meier, M.D.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF
-PDA Full Text
-PowerPoint Slide Set

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Moliterno, D. J.
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited
-E-mail When Letters Appear

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents, reduce the risk of restenosis. It is unclear whether there are differences in safety and efficacy between the two types of drug-eluting stents.

Methods We conducted a randomized, controlled, single-blind trial comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with paclitaxel-eluting stents in 1012 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization of the target lesion) by nine months. Follow-up angiography was completed in 540 of 1012 patients (53.4 percent).

Results The two groups had similar baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. The rate of major adverse cardiac events at nine months was 6.2 percent in the sirolimus-stent group and 10.8 percent in the paclitaxel-stent group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.86; P=0.009). The difference was driven by a lower rate of target-lesion revascularization in the sirolimus-stent group than in the paclitaxel-stent group (4.8 percent vs. 8.3 percent; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.34 to 0.93; P=0.03). Rates of death from cardiac causes were 0.6 percent in the sirolimus-stent group and 1.6 percent in the paclitaxel-stent group (P=0.15); the rates of myocardial infarction were 2.8 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively (P=0.49); and the rates of angiographic restenosis were 6.6 percent and 11.7 percent, respectively (P=0.02).

Conclusions As compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents, the use of sirolimus-eluting stents results in fewer major adverse cardiac events, primarily by decreasing the rates of clinical and angiographic restenosis.


Source Information

From the Departments of Cardiology (S.W., A.R., L.R., P.W., M.T., M.B., D.T., C.S., O.M.H., B.M.) and Social and Preventive Medicine (P.J.), University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland; the Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland (F.R.E., M.R., R.C., G.S., W.M., T.L.); and the Medical Research Council Health Services Research Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom (M.E.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Windecker at the Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland, or at stephan.windecker{at}insel.ch.

Full Text of this Article


Related Letters:

Drug-Eluting Coronary Stents
Alarcón J. A., Arribas J. M., Ruiz V., Czupryniak L., Pawlowski M., Loba J., Bonvini R. F., Verin V., Waksman R., Wolfram R. M., Jneid H., Jang I.-K., Palacios I., Kastrati A., Dibra A., Schömig A., Windecker S., Jüni P., Meier B., Moliterno D. J.
Extract | Full Text | PDF  
N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2404-2408, Dec 1, 2005. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.