Impact of vessel size on angiographic and clinical outcomes of revascularization with biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer and sirolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer the LEADERS trial substudy
Joanna J Wykrzykowska, Patrick W Serruys, Yoshinobu Onuma, Ton de Vries, Gerrit-Anne van Es, Pawel Buszman, Axel Linke, Thomas Ischinger, Volker Klauss, Roberto Corti, Franz Eberli, William Wijns, Marie-Claude Morice, Carlo di Mario, Robert Jan van Geuns, Peter Juni, Stephan Windecker, Joanna J Wykrzykowska, Patrick W Serruys, Yoshinobu Onuma, Ton de Vries, Gerrit-Anne van Es, Pawel Buszman, Axel Linke, Thomas Ischinger, Volker Klauss, Roberto Corti, Franz Eberli, William Wijns, Marie-Claude Morice, Carlo di Mario, Robert Jan van Geuns, Peter Juni, Stephan Windecker
Abstract
Objectives: We assessed the impact of vessel size on outcomes of stenting with biolimus-eluting degradable polymer stent (BES) and sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent (SES) within a randomized multicenter trial (LEADERS).
Background: Stenting of small vessels might be associated with higher rates of adverse events.
Methods: "All-comer" patients (n = 1,707) were randomized to BES and SES. Post-hoc-stratified analysis of angiographic and clinical outcomes at 9 months and 1 year, respectively, was performed for vessels with reference diameter <or=2.75 mm versus >2.75 mm.
Results: Of 1,707 patients, 429 patients in the BES group with 576 lesions and 434 patients in the SES group with 557 lesions had only small vessels treated (50.6% of the patient cohort). In patients with small vessels there was no significant difference in overall major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate (12.1% vs. 11.8%; p = 0.89) or target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate (9.6% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.26) between BES and SES. The MACE and TLR rates in the small-vessel patient population were higher than in the large-vessel population. The TLR rate was 9.6% versus 2.6%, and MACE rate was 12.1% versus 7.1% for small versus large vessels in the BES arm (TLR: hazard ratio [HR] = 3.724, p = 0.0013; MACE: HR = 1.720, p = 0.0412). In the SES arm, TLR was 7.4% versus 5.1%, and MACE was 11.8% versus 10.3% in small versus large vessels (TLR: HR = 1.435, p = 0.2594; MACE: HR = 1.149, p = 0.5546).
Conclusions: Prevalence of small vessel disease is high in an "all-comer" population with higher TLR and MACE rates. The BES and SES seem equivalent in treatment outcomes of small vessels in this "all-comer" patient population.
Source: PubMed