• Sigmund Silber, Stephan Windecker, Pascal Vranckx, Patrick W Serruys, and RESOLUTE All Comers investigators.
• Heart Centre at the Isar, Munich, Germany. sigmund@silber.com
• Lancet. 2011 Apr 9;377(9773):1241-7.

BackgroundIn the RESOLUTE All Comers trial, the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the Xience V everolimus-eluting stent for the primary stent-related endpoint of target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation) at 1 year. However, data for long-term safety and efficacy from randomised studies of new generation drug-eluting coronary stents in patients treated in routine clinical practice are scarce. We report the prespecified 2-year clinical outcomes from the RESOLUTE All Comers trial.MethodsIn 2008, patients with at least one coronary lesion 2.25-4.0 mm in diameter, with greater than 50% stenosis, were randomly assigned to a Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent or a Xience V everolimus-eluting stent at 17 centres in Europe and Israel. Randomisation was by an interactive voice response system stratified by centre. Study investigators were not masked to treatment allocation; but those who did data management and analysis, and patients were masked. There were no restrictions as to the number of vessels or lesions treated, or the number of stents implanted. We assessed prespecified safety and efficacy outcomes at 2 years with specific focus on patient-related composite (all death, all myocardial infarction, all revascularisation) and stent-related composite outcomes. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00617084.Findings1140 patients were assigned to the zotarolimus-eluting stent and 1152 to the everolimus-eluting stent; 1121 and 1128 patients, respectively, completed 2-year follow-up. The patient-related outcome (231 [20.6%] zotarolimus vs 231 [20.5%] everolimus; difference 0.1%, 95% CI-3.2 to 3.5; p=0.958) and stent-related outcome (126 [11.2%] vs 121 [10.7%]; difference 0.5%, -2.1 to 3.1; p=0.736) did not differ between groups, although rates of the stent-related outcome were substantially lower than were those for the patient-related outcome. Three patients in each group (0.3%) had very late (after 1 year) stent thrombosis.InterpretationSimilar safety and efficacy outcomes were sustained between two new generation drug-eluting stents at 2-year follow-up. The greater number of patient-related than stent-related events in patients with complex clinical and lesion characteristics emphasises that during long-term follow-up, the optimisation of secondary prevention is at least as important as the selection of which new generation drug-eluting stent to implant in a specific lesion.FundingMedtronic (USA).Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

32 keywords...

hide…