Related trials
		 
			
				 
				
					SORT-OUT-3, 2010 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					BASKET-PROVE (EES), 2010 - everolimus eluting stent  vs bare-metal stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					BASKET-PROVE (SES), 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent  vs bare-metal stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					SPIRIT IV, 2010 - everolimus eluting stent  vs paclitaxel eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					RESOLUTE All comers, 2010 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs everolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					GISSOC II, 2010 - sirolimus eluting stent  vs bare-metal stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					STICH (ventricular reconstruction), 2009 - CABG+surgical ventricular reconstruction  vs CABG
				
			 
			
				 
				
					COMPARE, 2009 - everolimus eluting stent  vs paclitaxel eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ZEST (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ISAR TEST 2 (vs ZES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol eluting stent  vs zotarolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ZEST (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs paclitaxel eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					BARI 2D, 2009 - CABG or PCI  vs medical treatment
				
			 
			
				 
				
					PASEO, 2009 - drug-eluting stents  vs bare-metal stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					SYNTAX, 2009 - paclitaxel eluting stent  vs CABG
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ISAR-TEST-4 (biodegradable polymer), 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ISAR TEST 2 (vs SES), 2009 - dual sirolimus, probucol eluting stent  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ISAR TEST 3 (PF), 2009 - polymer free sirolimus stent  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					GENIUS-STEMI, 2009 - Genous stent  vs bare-metal stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					Thiele, 2009 - sirolimus ES  vs MIDCAB
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ISAR-LEFT-MAIN, 2009 - sirolimus eluting stent  vs paclitaxel eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ZEST AMI (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					DEBATER (SES vs BMS), 2009 - sirolimus eluting stent  vs bare-metal stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ISAR TEST 3 (BP), 2009 - sirolimus biodegradable polymer  vs sirolimus eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ENDEAVOR IV, 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs paclitaxel eluting stent
				
			 
			
				 
				
					ZEST AMI (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus eluting stent  vs paclitaxel eluting stent
				
			 
		 
		 
		 
		
		See also:
		 
			
				
					All coronary artery disease clinical trials
				
			
		
			
			All clinical trials of myocardial revascularization 
			
		
		
			
			All clinical trials of sirolimus biodegradable polymer 
			
		
	 | 
	
		 
	 | 
	
	Treatments
	
	
		| Studied treatment | 
		
		biodegradable-polymer 0.4% rapamycin stent (180 mg rapamycin/cm2)
		 
		
		
		 | 
	 
	
		| Control treatment | 
		
		permanent-polymer rapamycin-eluting stent (Cypher) (140 mg rapamycin/cm2)
		 
		
		
		 | 
	 
		
			| Concomittant treatment | 
			oral loading dose of 600 mg clopidogrel at least 2 h prior to the intervention, regardless of whether
the patient was taking clopidogrel prior to admission. During
the procedure: intravenous aspirin, heparin or
bivalirudin; glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor usage was at the discretion
of the operators. After the intervention, all patients received
200 mg/day aspirin indefinitely, clopidogrel 150 mg for the first 3
days (or until discharge) followed by 75 mg/day for at least 6 months | 
		 
	 
	
	
	
	Patients
	
		
			| Patients | 
			Patients with de novo coronary lesions in native vessels | 
		 
				| Baseline characteristics | 
					
					
						
							| age | 
							66.1y  | 
						 
						
							| history of MI  (%) | 
							32.9%  | 
						 
						
							| diabetes (%) | 
							27.4%  | 
						 
						
							| unstable angina  (%) | 
							30.9%  | 
						 
						
							| LAD (%) | 
							43%  | 
						 
						
							| RCA (%) | 
							30.3%  | 
						 
						
							| LCx (%) | 
							26.7%  | 
						 
						
							| lesion length (mm) | 
							14.3mm  | 
						 
						
							| male (%) | 
							79.3ù  | 
						 
						
							| reference-vessel diameter | 
							2.75mm  | 
						 
						
							| totally occluded lesions | 
							7.7%  | 
						 
						
							|  bifurcated lesions | 
							26%  | 
						 
						
							| single vessel patients | 
							17.4%  | 
						 
						
							| multi vessels patients | 
							82.6%  | 
						 
					 						
					 | 
				 
	 
	
	
	
	
	
	
	Method and design
	
	
		| Randomized effectives | 
		202 / 202 (studied vs. control) | 
	 
		
			| Design | 
			Parallel groups | 
		 
		
			| Blinding | 
			open | 
		 
		
			| Follow-up duration | 
			12 months | 
		 
		
			| Number of centre | 
			2 | 
		 
		
			| Geographic area | 
			Germany | 
		 
		
			| Hypothesis | 
			Non inferiority | 
		 
		
			| Primary endpoint | 
			in-stent late luminal loss | 
		 
	
	 
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
  
	Results	
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
			Endpoint
		
	
	
		
		Studied treat. n/N
			
	
	
		
		Control treat. n/N
		
	
	
		
			Graph
		
	
	
		
			RR [95% CI]
		
	
	
		
			
				
				All cause death
				 
			
		
			
				
				4 / 202 
				
			
			
				
				4 / 202 
				
			
		
			
				
					
						classic
					
					
					
				
			
				
				
			
			
		
			
				
					1,00 [0,25;3,94]
				
			
	
	
		
			
				
				MI (fatal and non fatal)
				 
			
		
			
				
				3 / 202 
				
			
			
				
				4 / 202 
				
			
		
			
				
					
						classic
					
					
					
				
			
				
				
			
			
		
			
				
					0,75 [0,17;3,31]
				
			
	
	
		
			
				
				CABG
				 
			
		
			
				
				1 / 202 
				
			
			
				
				3 / 202 
				
			
		
			
				
					
						classic
					
					
					
				
			
				
				
			
			
		
			
				
					0,33 [0,03;3,18]
				
			
	
	
		
			
				
				target-vessel revascularization
				 
			
		
			
				
				12 / 202 
				
			
			
				
				16 / 202 
				
			
		
			
				
					
					
					
					
				
			
				
				
			
			
		
			
				
					0,75 [0,36;1,54]
				
			
	
	
		
			
				
				in-lesion binary restenosis 
				 
			
		
			
				
				12 / 202 
				
			
			
				
				13 / 202 
				
			
		
			
				
					
					
					
					
				
			
				
				
			
			
		
			
				
					0,92 [0,43;1,97]
				
			
	
	
		
			
				
				Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
				 
			
		
			
				
				2 / 202 
				
			
			
				
				4 / 202 
				
			
		
			
				
					
						classic
					
					
					
				
			
				
				
			
			
		
			
				
					0,50 [0,09;2,70]
				
			
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
			
				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
						 | 
						4 / 202 (2,0%) | 
						4 / 202 (2,0%) | 
						1,00 | 
						[0,25;3,94] | 
						 | 
						 | 
					 
					
					
						| 
							MI (fatal and non fatal)
						 | 
						3 / 202 (1,5%) | 
						4 / 202 (2,0%) | 
						0,75 | 
						[0,17;3,31] | 
						Q and non Q | 
						 | 
					 
					
						| 
							CABG
						 | 
						1 / 202 (0,5%) | 
						3 / 202 (1,5%) | 
						0,33 | 
						[0,03;3,18] | 
						 | 
						 | 
					 
					
						| 
							target-vessel revascularization
						 | 
						12 / 202 (5,9%) | 
						16 / 202 (7,9%) | 
						0,75 | 
						[0,36;1,54] | 
						 | 
						 | 
					 
					
					
						| 
							in-lesion binary restenosis 
						 | 
						12 / 202 (5,9%) | 
						13 / 202 (6,4%) | 
						0,92 | 
						[0,43;1,97] | 
						in segment | 
						 | 
					 
					
					
					
					
					
					
						| 
							Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up)
						 | 
						2 / 202 (1,0%) | 
						4 / 202 (2,0%) | 
						0,50 | 
						[0,09;2,70] | 
						 | 
						 | 
					 
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
		
			| 
			The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
			 | 
		 
		
			| 
			Reference(s) used for data extraction: 
			 | 
		 
		 
		
		
			
			| Endpoint | 
			studied treat. | 
			control treat. | 
			mean diff | 
			 
		 
	 
	
	
	
				
					| 
						Absolute risk reduction 
					 | 
				 
	
		| Endpoint | 
		Events rate | 
		Absolute risk reduction (ARR) | 
	 
	
		| Studied treat. | 
		Control treat. | 
	 
			
				| All cause death | 
				1,98% | 
				1,98% | 
				
					0,0‰
				 | 
			 
			
				| MI (fatal and non fatal) | 
				1,49% | 
				1,98% | 
				
					-5,0‰
				 | 
			 
			
				| CABG | 
				4,95‰ | 
				1,49% | 
				
					-9,9‰
				 | 
			 
			
				| target-vessel revascularization | 
				5,94% | 
				7,92% | 
				
					-19,8‰
				 | 
			 
			
				| in-lesion binary restenosis  | 
				5,94% | 
				6,44% | 
				
					-5,0‰
				 | 
			 
			
				| Stent thrombosis (any, end of follow up) | 
				9,90‰ | 
				1,98% | 
				
					-9,9‰
				 | 
			 
	 	
	 
Meta-analysis of all similar trials: 
			
				
					Drug eluting stent in coronary artery disease for all type of patients
				
			 
			
				
					myocardial revascularization in coronary artery disease for all type of patient
				
			 
	
  
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
		 
		Reference(s)
	
	
	
			- 
				
			    Mehilli J, Byrne RA, Wieczorek A, Iijima R, Schulz S, Bruskina O, Pache J, Wessely R, Schömig A, Kastrati A. 
			    .
			    Eur Heart J 2008 Aug;29:1975-82
					- 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn253
			    
 
				
					 
					Pubmed
				 
				|
				
					Hubmed
				
				| Fulltext
		 
		
			- 
				
			    Byrne RA, Kufner S, Tiroch K, Massberg S, Laugwitz KL, Birkmeier A, Schulz S, Mehilli J. 
			    Randomised trial of three rapamycin-eluting stents with different coating strategies for the reduction of coronary restenosis: 2-year follow-up results..
			    Heart 2009;95:1489-94
			    
 
				
					 
					Pubmed
				 
				|
				
					Hubmed
				
				| Fulltext
		 
		
	 	
			 
			
 |