Comparison of bioresorbable vs durable polymer drug-eluting stents in unprotected left main (from the RAIN-CARDIOGROUP VII Study)

Mario Iannaccone, Umberto Barbero, Michele De Benedictis, Yoichi Imori, Giorgio Quadri, Daniela Trabattoni, Nicola Ryan, Giuseppe Venuti, Andrea Montabone, Wojciech Wojakowski, Andrea Rognoni, Gerard Helft, Radoslaw Parma, Leonardo De Luca, Michele Autelli, Giacomo Boccuzzi, Alessio Mattesini, Christian Templin, Enrico Cerrato, Wojciech WańhaGrzegorz Smolka, Zenon Huczek, Francesco Tomassini, Bernardo Cortese, Davide Capodanno, Alaide Chieffo, Ivan Nuñez-Gil, Sebastiano Gili, Antonia Bassignana, Carlo di Mario, Baldassarre Doronzo, Pierluigi Omedè, Maurizio D'Amico, Delio Tedeschi, Ferdinando Varbella, Thomas Luscher, Imad Sheiban, Javier Escaned, Mauro Rinaldi, Fabrizio D'Ascenzo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the impact of bioresorbable polymer drug eluting stent (BP-DES) compared to durable polymer drug eluting stent (DP-DES) in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention using ultrathin stents in left main or bifurcations. METHODS: In the RAIN registry (ClinicalTrials NCT03544294, june 2018 retrospectively registered) patients with a ULM or bifurcation stenosis treated with PCI using ultrathin stents (struts thinner than 81 μm) were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR); major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, TLR and stent thrombosis) and its components, along with target vessel revascularization (TVR) were the secondary ones. A propensity score with matching analysis to compare patients treated with BP-DES versus DP-DES was also assessed. RESULTS: From 3001 enrolled patients, after propensity score analysis 1400 patients (700 for each group) were selected. Among them, 352 had ULM disease and 1048 had non-LM bifurcations. At 16 months (12-22), rates of TLR (3.7% vs 2.9%, p = 0.22) and MACE were similar (12.3% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.74) as well as for the other endpoints. Sensitivity analysis of outcomes after a two-stents strategy, showed better outcome in term of MACE (20.4% vs 10%, p = 0.03) and TVR (12% vs 4.6%, p = 0.05) and a trend towards lower TLR in patients treated with BP-DES. CONCLUSION: In patients with bifurcations or ULM treated with ultrathin stents BP-DES seems to perform similarly to DP-DES: the trends toward improved clinical outcomes in patients treated with the BP-DES might potentially be of value for speculating the stent choice in selected high-risk subgroups of patients at increased risk of ischemic events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03544294. Retrospectively registered June 1, 2018.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)225
Number of pages1
JournalBMC Cardiovascular Disorders
Volume20
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 15 2020

Keywords

  • Coronary bifurcation
  • Drug eluting stents
  • Left main
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Struts thickness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of bioresorbable vs durable polymer drug-eluting stents in unprotected left main (from the RAIN-CARDIOGROUP VII Study)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this