• JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Jul 2012

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. The PRECOMBAT-2 (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) study.

    • Young-Hak Kim, Duk-Woo Park, Jung-Min Ahn, Sung-Cheol Yun, Hae Geun Song, Jong-Young Lee, Won-Jang Kim, Soo-Jin Kang, Seung-Whan Lee, Cheol Whan Lee, Seong-Wook Park, Yangsoo Jang, Myung-Ho Jeong, Hyo-Soo Kim, Seung-Ho Hur, Seung-Woon Rha, Do-Sun Lim, Sung-Ho Her, Ki Bae Seung, In-Whan Seong, Seung-Jung Park, and PRECOMBAT-2 Investigators.
    • University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
    • JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Jul 1; 5 (7): 708-17.

    ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis.BackgroundThe clinical benefit of second-generation DES for ULMCA stenosis has not been determined.MethodsThe authors assessed 334 consecutive patients who received everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for ULMCA stenosis between 2009 and 2010. The 18-month incidence rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR), were compared with those of a randomized study comparing patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (n = 327) or coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) (n = 272).ResultsEES (8.9%) showed a comparable incidence of MACCE as SES (10.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] of EES: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51 to 1.40; p = 0.51) and CABG (6.7%, aHR of EES: 1.40; 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.54; p = 0.26). The composite incidence of death, MI, or stroke also did not differ among patients receiving EES (3.3%), SES (3.7%; aHR of EES: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.47; p = 0.29), and CABG (4.8%; aHR of EES: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.54; p = 0.34). However, the incidence of ischemia-driven TVR in the EES group (6.5%) was higher than in the CABG group (2.6%, aHR of EES: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.17 to 6.58; p = 0.02), but comparable to SES (8.2%, aHR of EES: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.64 to 2.06; p = 0.65). Angiographic restenosis rates were similar in the SES and EES groups (13.8% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.16).ConclusionsSecond-generation EES had a similar 18-month risk of MACCE for ULMCA stenosis as first-generation SES or CABG.Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…