Randomized comparison of novel biodegradable polymer and durable polymer-coated cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stents: Three-Year Outcomes of the I-LOVE-IT 2 Trial

8Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of the novel biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) versus the durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (DP-SES) in the I-LOVE-IT2 trial. Backgrounds: Comparisons of the long-term safety and efficiency of the BP-DES versus the DP-DES are limited. Methods: A total of 2,737 patients eligible for coronary stenting were randomized to the BP-SES or DP-SES group at a 2:1 ratio. The primary endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF) was defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. Results: A three-year clinical follow-up period was available for 2,663 (97.3%) patients. There were no significant differences in TLF (8.9% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.81), patient-oriented composite endpoint (PoCE) (15.2% vs.14.5%, P = 0.63), or individual components between the BP-SES and DP-SES. Definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) was low and similar at 3 years (0.8% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.64). Landmark analysis of 1–3 years showed that the TLF (2.7% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.81), PoCE (6.2% vs. 5.1%, P = 0.28), and definite/probable ST (0.4% vs. 0.4%, P = 1.00) were comparable between the 2 arms. Conclusions: In this prospective randomized trial, the BP-SES showed similar clinical results versus the DP-SES in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes over a 3-year follow-up period.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Song, L., Li, J., Guan, C., Jing, Q., Lu, S., Yang, L., … Han, Y. (2018). Randomized comparison of novel biodegradable polymer and durable polymer-coated cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting stents: Three-Year Outcomes of the I-LOVE-IT 2 Trial. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 91, 608–616. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.27465

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free