Abstract

Aim: was to compare annual results of the use of stents with drug eluting - «NanoMed» and Orsiro.

Material and methods: in a randomized prospective study, an analysis of clinical and angiographic data of 1040 patients after stenting of coronary arteries with the observation period of 12 months was performed. The study and control groups randomly included 520 patients with implanted stents «NanoMed» and Orsiro.

Results: main initial clinical demographic and angiographic indicators did not statistically significantly differ. The primary endpoint (TLF - target lesion failure) was achieved in 6.5 and 5.9% in «NanoMed» and Orsiro groups, respectively (p = 0.7). Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was performed in study and control groups, respectively, in 1.7 versus 1.2% of cases (p = 0.4).

Conclusion: thus, in a comparative analysis of the use of stents «NanoMed» and Orsiro for a period of 12 months - no statistically significant difference was revealed.

References

1.     El-Hayek G, Bangalore S, Casso Dominguez A, et al. Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials Comparing Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent to Second-Generation Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2017; 10(5): 462-473.

2.     Joner M, Finn A, Farb A, et al. Pathology of drug-eluting stents in humans: delayed healing and late thrombotic risk. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006; 48: 193-202.

3.     Sarno G, Lagerqvist B, Fmbert O, et al. Lower risk of stent thrombosis and restenosis with unrestricted use of 'newgeneration' drug-eluting stents: a report from the nation wide Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR). Eur. Heart J. 2012; 33(5): 606-613.

4.     ittelbach M, Diener T Orsiro - the first hybrid drug-eluting stent, opening up a new class of drug-eluting stents for superior patient outcomes. Interv. Cardiol. 2011; 6(2):142-144.

5.     Kandzari D, Mauri L, Koolen J, et al. Ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary revascularization (BIOFLOW V): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2017; 390: 1843-1852.

6.     Cutlip D, Windecker S, Mehran R, et al. Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials. A Case for Standardized Definitions. Research Consortium. Circulation. 2007; 115(17): 2344-2351.

7.     Thygesen K, Alpert J, Jaffe A, et al. Third Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Expert consensus document. Circulation. 2012; 126: 2020-2035.

8.     Silber S, Windecker S, Vranckx P, Serruys PW. Unrestricted randomiseduse of two new generation drug-eluting coronary stents: 2-year patient-related versus stent-related outcomes from the RESOLUTE All Comers Trial. Lancet. 2011; 377: 1241-1247.

9.     Bazylev VV, SHmatkov MG, Morozov ZA. Comparative evaluation of endothelialization of stents with permanent and biodegradable coatings at an early stage with help of optical coherence tomography. Diagnosticheskaya i intervencionnaya radiologiya. 2017: 11(4): 11-15. [In Russ]

10.   Bazylev VV, SHmatkov MG, Morozov ZA. Comparative results of the use of coronary stents with drug coating «Nanomed» and Orsiro. Angiologiya i sosudistaya hirurgiya. 2019 ; 25(2): 57-62. [In Russ]

11.   Prohorihin AA, Bajstrukov VI, Grazhdankin IO, et al. Simple, blind, prospective, randomized, multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of the KalIpso sirolimus-eluting coronary stent and the XiencePrime everolimus-eluting coronary stent: PATRIOT study results. Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiohirurgiya. 2017; 21(3): 76-85. [In Russ]