Stent com liberação de everolimus vs. stent com liberação de zotarolimus na prática clínica do mundo real

Abstract

Everolimus-Eluting Stent versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent in the Real Word Clinical PracticeBackground: The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) has proven to be effective in different angiographic scenarios. However, recent concerns with the occurrence of very late stent thrombosis with the first DES generation, probably related to delayed or incomplete endothelization, have led to the development of new safer and more effective devices. Method: Retrospective, single center study, including patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2006 and December 2008, treated with everolimuseluting stent (EES) (Xience V TM /Promus TM ) and zotarolimuseluting stent (ZES) (Endeavor TM ). Our objective was to compare the rates of major adverse cardiac events between EES and ZES patients after 12 months of follow-up. Results: Overall, 198 patients with 266 lesions were included in the study. Mean age was 60 + 10 years and 39% had diabetes mellitus, without significant differences between groups. The reference diameter (2.3 + 0.5 mm vs. 2.38 + 0.2 mm; P = 0.14), as well as lesion length (16.3 + 9.4 mm vs. 16.1 + 11.3 mm; P = 0.89), were also not significantly different between groups. After 12 months of follow-up, the rate of major adverse cardiac events was 8.16% in the EES group vs. 8% in the ZES group (P = 0.96), with a global rate of target-lesion revascularization of 2% (1% EES and 3% ZES; P = 0.32). There were no cases of definite stent thrombosis. Conclusion: In this study of non-selected patients, the rates of major adverse cardiac events were similar between patients treated in the EES and ZES groups, with low target-lesion revascularization rates and excellent safety profile after 12 months of follow-up.

Desempenho dos stents farmacológicos de segunda geração com liberação de everolimus no tratamento de pacientes com lesões coronárias de novo

“…Recentemente dois importantes registros nacionais publicados por Chamié et al 21 e Collet et al 22 , incluindo pacientes da prática cotidiana, confirmaram os achados anteriores de eficácia e segurança no tratamento de lesões complexas com SEE, com reduzida ocorrência de eventos adversos no primeiro ano após o implante.…”