Related trials
SPIRIT IV, 2010 - everolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
ISAR-DESIRE-2, 2010 - sirolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
SORT-OUT-3, 2010 - zotarolimus ES vs sirolimus ES
RESOLUTE, 2010 - zotarolimus ES vs everolimus ES
Thiele, 2009 - sirolimus ES vs MIDCAB
TRIANA, 2009 - primary ballon angioplasty vs tenecteplase
ZEST AMI (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs sirolimus ES
ISAR TEST 3 (BP), 2009 - biodegradable-polymer sirolimus stent vs sirolimus ES
DEBATER (SES vs BMS), 2009 - sirolimus ES vs bare-metal stent
STICH (ventricular reconstruction), 2009 - CABG+surgical ventricular reconstruction vs CABG
NORDISTEMI, 2009 - thrombolysis + angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis
ENDEAVOR IV, 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
ZEST AMI (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
Juwana, 2009 - sirolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
COMPARE, 2009 - everolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
ISAR TEST 2 (vs ZES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol ES vs zotarolimus ES
ZEST (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES
BARI 2D, 2009 - CABG or PCI vs medical treatment
ZEST (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs sirolimus ES
ISAR-TEST-4, 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer vs sirolimus ES
PASEO, 2009 - drug ES vs bare-metal stent
GENIUS-STEMI, 2009 - Genous stent vs bare-metal stent
ISAR TEST 2 (vs SES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol ES vs sirolimus ES
ISAR TEST 3 (PF), 2009 - polymer free sirolimus stent vs sirolimus ES
SYNTAX, 2009 - paclitaxel ES vs CABG
See also:
All acute myocardial infarction clinical trials
All coronary artery disease clinical trials
All clinical trials of revascularization with drug eluting stent
All clinical trials of sirolimus ES
|
|
TYPHOON study, 2006
|
|
[NCT00232830]
|
Treatments
| Studied treatment |
Cypher or CypherSelect
|
| Control treatment |
any commerciallyavailable uncoated stent
|
Patients
| Patients |
AMI |
| Baseline characteristics |
| age |
59 |
| diabetes (%) |
16% |
| Lesion diameter inclusion criteria |
2.25-3.50 |
| Female (%) |
22% |
|
Method and design
| Randomized effectives |
356 / 359 (studied vs. control) |
| Design |
Parallel groups |
| Blinding |
open |
| Follow-up duration |
12 months |
| Number of centre |
48 |
| Geographic area |
Worldwide (15 countries) |
| Primary endpoint |
Combination of vesselrelateddeath, AMI, TVR |
Results
Endpoint
Studied treat. n/N
Control treat. n/N
Graph
RR [95% CI]
All cause death
8 / 355
8 / 357
classic
1,01 [0,38;2,65]
target-vessel revascularization
20 / 355
47 / 357
0,43 [0,26;0,71]
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
12 / 355
13 / 357
classic
0,93 [0,43;2,01]
0
2
1.0
|
Relative risks
|
| Endpoint |
Events (%) |
Relative Risk |
95% CI |
Endpoint definition in the trial |
Ref |
| Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
|
All cause death
|
8 / 355 (2,3%) |
8 / 357 (2,2%) |
1,01 |
[0,38;2,65] |
|
|
|
Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
|
12 / 355 (3,4%) |
13 / 357 (3,6%) |
0,93 |
[0,43;2,01] |
|
|
|
target-vessel revascularization
|
20 / 355 (5,6%) |
47 / 357 (13,2%) |
0,43 |
[0,26;0,71] |
|
|
|
The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
|
|
Reference(s) used for data extraction:
0:
|
| Endpoint |
studied treat. |
control treat. |
mean diff |
|
Absolute risk reduction
|
| Endpoint |
Events rate |
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
| Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
| All cause death |
2,25% |
2,24% |
0,1‰
|
| Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up) |
3,38% |
3,64% |
-2,6‰
|
| target-vessel revascularization |
5,63% |
13,17% |
-75,3‰
|
Reference(s)
-
Spaulding C, Henry P, Teiger E, Beatt K, Bramucci E, Carri D, Slama MS, Merkely B, Erglis A, Margheri M, Varenne O, Cebrian A, Stoll HP, Snead DB, Bode C.
Sirolimus-eluting versus uncoated stents in acute myocardial infarction..
N Engl J Med 2006;355:1093-104
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
|