Search

Background The Orsiro is a hybrid stent which has passive (amorphous silicon carbide) and active (poly-L-lactic acid, PLLA) coatings. The first layer encapsulates the stent struts, promoting lower local inflammation, whereas the second layer releases sirolimus through a biodegradable matrix. This study's aim was to compare the results of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with Orsiro and Xience™ V stents (everolimus-eluting stent) in daily clinical practice. Methods Observational study in which patients were divided into two groups: those who received only one or more Orsiro stents, and those who received only XienceTM V stents. Early and late outcomes were prospectively collected. Results Between September 2012 and March 2014, this study included 92 and 108 patients treated with Orsiro and Xience™ V stents, respectively. Clinical, angiographic, and procedure characteristics were mostly similar between groups. Rates of procedure success (98.9% vs. 95.4%; p = 0.22), in-hospital mortality (1.1% vs. 0%; p = 0.40) and stent thrombosis (0% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.30) did not differ between groups. Time of follow-up was 434 ± 111 and 477 ± 66 days (p = 0.23), respectively, and differences in mortality (0.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.30), stent thrombosis (0% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.30), or need for repeat revascularization of the target lesion (0% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.30) were not observed. Conclusions Orsiro and Xience™ V stents showed similar performance, with low rates of early and late clinical and angiographic events.

ResumoIntroduçãoO stent Orsiro é um stent híbrido que possui revestimentos passivo (carbeto de silício amorfo) e ativo (ácido poli‐L‐lático, PLLA). O primeiro encapsula as hastes do stent, promovendo menor inflamação local, e o segundo libera o sirolimus por meio de matriz biodegradável. Nosso objetivo foi comparar os resultados das intervenções coronárias percutâneas (ICP) dos stents Orsiro e Xience® V (eluidor de everolimus) na prática clínica diária.MétodosEstudo observacional em que os pacientes foram alocados em dois grupos: os que receberam exclusivamente um ou mais stents Orsiro e os que receberam exclusivamente stents Xience® V. Desfechos iniciais e tardios foram prospectivamente coletados.ResultadosEntre setembro de 2012 e março de 2014, incluímos 92 e 108 pacientes tratados com stent Orsiro e Xience® V, respectivamente. Características clínicas, angiográficas e do procedimento foram, em sua maioria, semelhantes entre os grupos. As taxas de sucesso do procedimento (98,9% vs. 95,4%; p = 0,22), mortalidade (1,1% vs. 0%; p = 0,40) e trombose do stent (0% vs. 0,9%; p = 0,30) hospitalares não diferiram entre os grupos. O tempo de seguimento foi de 434 ± 111 e 477 ± 66 dias (p = 0,23), respectivamente, não sendo observadas diferenças na mortalidade (0,9% vs. 0%; p = 0,30), trombose do stent (0% vs. 0,9%; p = 0,30) e nem na necessidade de revascularização da lesão alvo (0% vs. 0,9%; p = 0,30).ConclusõesOs stents Orsiro e Xience® V apresentaram desempenho semelhante, com baixas taxas de eventos clínicos e angiográficos iniciais e tardios.AbstractBackgroundThe Orsiro is a hybrid stent which has passive (amorphous silicon carbide) and active (poly‐L‐lactic acid, PLLA) coatings. The first layer encapsulates the stent struts, promoting lower local inflammation, whereas the second layer releases sirolimus through a biodegradable matrix. This study's aim was to compare the results of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with Orsiro and Xience™ V stents (everolimus‐eluting stent) in daily clinical practice.MethodsObservational study in which patients were divided into two groups: those who received only one or more Orsiro stents, and those who received only XienceTM V stents. Early and late outcomes were prospectively collected.ResultsBetween September 2012 and March 2014, this study included 92 and 108 patients treated with Orsiro and Xience™ V stents, respectively. Clinical, angiographic, and procedure characteristics were mostly similar between groups. Rates of procedure success (98.9% vs. 95.4%; p = 0.22), in‐hospital mortality (1.1% vs. 0%; p = 0.40) and stent thrombosis (0% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.30) did not differ between groups. Time of follow‐up was 434 ± 111 and 477 ± 66 days (p = 0.23), respectively, and differences in mortality (0.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.30), stent thrombosis (0% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.30), or need for repeat revascularization of the target lesion (0% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.30) were not observed.ConclusionsOrsiro and Xience™ V stents showed similar performance, with low rates of early and late clinical and angiographic events.