TY - JOUR
T1 - Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft lesions (ISAR-CABG)
T2 - A randomised controlled superiority trial
AU - Mehilli, Julinda
AU - Pache, Jürgen
AU - Abdel-Wahab, Mohamed
AU - Schulz, Stefanie
AU - Byrne, Robert A.
AU - Tiroch, Klaus
AU - Hausleiter, Jörg
AU - Seyfarth, Melchior
AU - Ott, Ilka
AU - Ibrahim, Tareq
AU - Fusaro, Massimiliano
AU - Laugwitz, Karl Ludwig
AU - Massberg, Steffen
AU - Neumann, Franz Josef
AU - Richardt, Gert
AU - Schömig, Albert
AU - Kastrati, Adnan
PY - 2011/9/17
Y1 - 2011/9/17
N2 - Background Comparative assessment of clinical outcomes after use of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for treatment of aortocoronary saphenous vein graft lesions has not been undertaken in large randomised trials. We aimed to undertake a comparison in a randomised trial powered for clinical endpoints. Methods In this randomised superiority trial, patients with de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions were assigned by computer-generated sequence (1:1:1:3) to receive either drug-eluting stents (one of three types: permanent-polymer paclitaxel-eluting stents, permanent-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents, or biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents) or bare-metal stents. Randomisation took place immediately after crossing of the lesion with a guidewire, and was stratifi ed for each participating centre. Investigators assessing data were masked to treatment allocation; patients were not masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularisation at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00611910. Findings 610 patients were allocated to treatment groups (303 drug-eluting stent, 307 bare-metal stent). Drug-eluting stents reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint compared with bare-metal stents (44 [15%] vs 66 [22%] patients; hazard ratio [HR] 0•64, 95% CI 0•44-0•94; p=0•02). Target lesion revascularisation rate was reduced by drug-eluting stents (19 [7%] vs 37 [13%] patients; HR 0•49, 95% CI 0•28-0•86; p=0•01). No signifi cant diff erences were seen between drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents regarding all-cause mortality (15 [5%] vs 14 [5%] patients; HR 1•08, 95% CI 0•52-2•24; p=0•83), myocardial infarction (12 [4%] vs 18 [6%]; HR 0•66, 95% CI 0•32-1•37; p=0•27), or defi nite or probable stent thrombosis (2 [1%] in both groups; HR 1•00, 95% CI 0•14-7•10; p=0•99). Interpretation In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions, drug-eluting stents are the preferred treatment option because they reduce the risk of adverse events compared with bare-metal stents. Funding Deutsches Herzzentrum.
AB - Background Comparative assessment of clinical outcomes after use of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for treatment of aortocoronary saphenous vein graft lesions has not been undertaken in large randomised trials. We aimed to undertake a comparison in a randomised trial powered for clinical endpoints. Methods In this randomised superiority trial, patients with de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions were assigned by computer-generated sequence (1:1:1:3) to receive either drug-eluting stents (one of three types: permanent-polymer paclitaxel-eluting stents, permanent-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents, or biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents) or bare-metal stents. Randomisation took place immediately after crossing of the lesion with a guidewire, and was stratifi ed for each participating centre. Investigators assessing data were masked to treatment allocation; patients were not masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularisation at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00611910. Findings 610 patients were allocated to treatment groups (303 drug-eluting stent, 307 bare-metal stent). Drug-eluting stents reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint compared with bare-metal stents (44 [15%] vs 66 [22%] patients; hazard ratio [HR] 0•64, 95% CI 0•44-0•94; p=0•02). Target lesion revascularisation rate was reduced by drug-eluting stents (19 [7%] vs 37 [13%] patients; HR 0•49, 95% CI 0•28-0•86; p=0•01). No signifi cant diff erences were seen between drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents regarding all-cause mortality (15 [5%] vs 14 [5%] patients; HR 1•08, 95% CI 0•52-2•24; p=0•83), myocardial infarction (12 [4%] vs 18 [6%]; HR 0•66, 95% CI 0•32-1•37; p=0•27), or defi nite or probable stent thrombosis (2 [1%] in both groups; HR 1•00, 95% CI 0•14-7•10; p=0•99). Interpretation In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions, drug-eluting stents are the preferred treatment option because they reduce the risk of adverse events compared with bare-metal stents. Funding Deutsches Herzzentrum.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052962442&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61255-5
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61255-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 21872918
AN - SCOPUS:80052962442
SN - 0140-6736
VL - 378
SP - 1071
EP - 1078
JO - The Lancet
JF - The Lancet
IS - 9796
ER -