Search

Drug eluting stents with biodegradable polymers have been developed to address the risk of very late adverse events. Long-term comparison data between the biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent (BES; Nobori®) and the second-generation durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent (EES; XIENCE V® or XIENCE PRIME® or PROMUS™) in diabetic patients are scarce. The COMPARE II trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, randomized, all-comers trial which assigned patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a 2:1 fashion to either BES or EES. We analyzed the safety and efficacy outcomes in diabetic patients at 5 year follow-up. The primary pre-specified composite endpoint major adverse cardiac event (MACE) was defined as cardiac death, non-fatal target-vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization (CD-TVR). Out of 2707 study patients, 588 were diabetics (21.7%) of whom 391 were treated with BES and 197 with EES. At 5 years follow-up, MACE occurred in 87 patients (22.2%) in the BES group and in 34 patients (17.2%) in the EES group (p =.34). Other safety and efficacy endpoints did not differ between stent groups. At 5 years follow-up, no differences in terms of MACE as well as all analyzed safety and efficacy measures, including stent thrombosis, between the biodegradable polymer-coated BES and the durable polymer-coated EES in diabetic patients were observed. • DM continues to negatively impact on the performance of new-generation DES. • Higher rates of adverse events are reported in diabetic patients. • No difference in terms of MACE and TLF were detected between BES and EES groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Although large clinical trials have shown that everolimus-eluting stents (EES) significantly reduce target vessel revascularisation (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI) and stent thrombosis (ST) compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in diverse populations, there is a paucity of data comparing EES and PES in patients presenting with MI., Methods and Results: We performed a post hoc subgroup analysis on COMPARE, an all-comer trial comparing EES to PES. We identified 863 patients (EES=434, PES=429 treated for MI: 452 ST-elevation MI (STEMI) and 411 non ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI). EES was associated with a significant reduction in the primary endpoint, a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, and TVR, at two years (RR=0.57; 95% CI: 0.40-0.83, p=0.002). While the effect was more marked in the STEMI (RR=0.51; 95% CI: 0.30-0.87, p=0.01) than the NSTEMI subgroup (RR=0.65; 95% CI: 0.39-1.08, p=0.09), the interaction p-value (0.5) suggests that a difference in treatment effect between presentations is unlikely. ST rates were significantly lower with EES (RR=0.30; 95% CI: 0.12-0.73, p=0.005)., Conclusions: At two years, EES results are superior to PES in terms of safety and efficacy endpoints in treatment of MI.