Title of article
Polymer-Based Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents Are Superior to Nonpolymer-Based Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Lesions
Author/Authors
Iofina، نويسنده , , Ekaterina and Langenberg، نويسنده , , Roswitha and Blindt، نويسنده , , Rüdiger and Kühl، نويسنده , , Harald and Kelm، نويسنده , , Malte and Hoffmann، نويسنده , , Rainer، نويسنده ,
Issue Information
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2006
Pages
6
From page
1022
To page
1027
Abstract
Although polymer coating of coronary stents enables sufficient loading and release of incorporated drugs, it has also been associated with potentially negative effects. This study compared the clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) outcomes of patients treated with polymer- versus nonpolymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs). Sixty-five consecutive patients (70 de novo lesions) treated with polymer-based PESs (TAXUS, 1 μg/mm2 of paclitaxel; Boston Scientific Corp.) and 65 consecutive patients (65 de novo lesions) treated with nonpolymer-based PESs (V-Flex Plus, 2.7 μg/mm2 of paclitaxel; Cook, Inc.) were enrolled in the study. Six-month angiographic follow-up was performed on 54 lesions of the polymer-based PES group and 51 lesions of the nonpolymer-based PES group. IVUS at angiographic follow-up was performed in 61 of the first 70 included lesions. At 6-month IVUS follow-up, mean intimal hyperplasia cross-sectional area was 2.36 ± 1.60 mm2 in the nonpolymer-based PES group versus 0.62 ± 0.41 mm2 in the polymer-based PES group (p = 0.003). Implantation of polymer-based PESs resulted in significantly lower in-stent late lumen loss (0.22 ± 0.27 vs 0.74 ± 0.61 mm, respectively, p <0.001). In-stent binary restenosis rate was 5% versus 20%, respectively (p <0.001). Target lesion revascularization rate was 9% after implantation of polymer-based PES versus 18% (p = 0.128) after implantation of nonpolymer-based PES, and the major adverse cardiac event rate was 9% versus 23%, respectively (p = 0.032). In conclusion, polymer-based PESs result in superior angiographic and IVUS follow-up findings compared with nonpolymer-based PESs.
Journal title
American Journal of Cardiology
Serial Year
2006
Journal title
American Journal of Cardiology
Record number
1901519
Link To Document