September 27th, 2010
Xience V Holds Its Own With Sirolimus-Eluting Stents
Larry Husten, PHD
In the trials presented on Thursday at TCT, the everolimus-eluting Xience V stent (EES) proved superior to the paclitaxel-eluting Taxus stent at 2 years. But, as Gregg Stone discussed here recently, a more formidable comparator for EES are the sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). Two trials presented on Friday demonstrated that EES are comparable in efficacy to SES.
Robert Byrne presented the two-year outcomes of the ISAR-TEST 4 trial comparing the EES and the SES in 1304 patients. He reported that the rate of cardiac death, target vessel MI, or TLR was 18.8% with SES versus 16% with EES, a difference that did not achieve statistical significance. Byrne concluded that the stents “provide comparable clinical outcomes out to 2 years.”
In the SORT OUT IV trial presented by Lisette Okkels Jensen, nearly 2800 patients were randomized to EES or SES. The primary endpoint — major adverse cardiac events — was reached in 4.9% of the EES group and 5.2% of the SES group, therefore meeting the predefined criteria for non-inferiority.
One Response to “Xience V Holds Its Own With Sirolimus-Eluting Stents”
NEJM Journal Watch — Recent Cardiology Articles- Anticoagulation in Patients with Cancer-Associated Pulmonary Embolism: How Long is Long Enough?
- Spironolactone Use After Percutaneous Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction
- CRISPR/Cas9 Gene Editing for Transthyretin Cardiomyopathy
- Does Colchicine Reduce Cardiac Events After Myocardial Infarction?
- First-Line Therapy for Ventricular Tachycardia After MI: What's the Best Approach?
Even though there was no statistical difference, there was a difference that always favored EES. It also probably has been around longer. I f I had to be on the receiving end for one of these. I would choose EES.
Competing interests pertaining specifically to this post, comment, or both:
none