A randomized comparison of sirolimus-eluting stent with balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis: results of the Restenosis Intrastent: Balloon Angioplasty Versus Elective Sirolimus-Eluting Stenting (RIBS-II) trial
Fernando Alfonso, Maria-José Pérez-Vizcayno, Rosana Hernandez, Armando Bethencourt, Vicens Martí, Jose R López-Mínguez, Juan Angel, Ramón Mantilla, Cesar Morís, Angel Cequier, Manel Sabaté, Javier Escaned, Raúl Moreno, Camino Bañuelos, Alfonso Suárez, Carlos Macaya, RIBS-II Investigators, Fernando Alfonso, Maria-José Pérez-Vizcayno, Rosana Hernandez, Armando Bethencourt, Vicens Martí, Jose R López-Mínguez, Juan Angel, Ramón Mantilla, Cesar Morís, Angel Cequier, Manel Sabaté, Javier Escaned, Raúl Moreno, Camino Bañuelos, Alfonso Suárez, Carlos Macaya, RIBS-II Investigators
Abstract
Objectives: We sought to assess the effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).
Background: Treatment of patients with ISR remains a challenge.
Methods: The Restenosis Intrastent: Balloon Angioplasty Versus Elective Sirolimus-Eluting Stenting (RIBS-II) study is a multicenter randomized trial conducted in 150 patients with ISR (76 allocated to SES and 74 to balloon angioplasty [BA]). The primary end point was recurrent restenosis rate at nine months. Secondary end points included prespecified subgroup analysis, lumen volume on intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and a composite of major clinical events at one year.
Results: Angiographic success was obtained in all patients. At 9-month angiographic follow-up (96% of eligible patients) minimal lumen diameter was larger (2.52 mm [interquartile range (IQR) 2.09 to 2.81] vs. 1.54 mm [IQR 0.91 to 2.05]; p < 0.001) and recurrent restenosis rate was lower (11% vs. 39%; p < 0.001) in the SES group. Prespecified subgroup analyses were consistent with the main outcome measure. Lumen volume on IVUS at 9 months was also larger (279 mm3 [IQR 227 to 300] vs. 197 mm3 [IQR 177 to 230]; p < 0.001) in the SES group. At one-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), the event-free survival (freedom from death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) was significantly improved in the SES group (88% vs. 69%; p < 0.004) as the result of a lower requirement for target vessel revascularization (11% vs. 30%; p < 0.003).
Conclusions: In patients with ISR, the use of SES provides superior long-term clinical, angiographic, and IVUS outcome than BA treatment.
Source: PubMed