SISR trial suggests sirolimus-eluting stents are superior to brachytherapy as treatment for patients with thrombosis in a bare metal stent
A new analysis of long-term trial data suggests sirolimus-eluting
stents are superior to brachytherapy as treatment for patients with thrombosis
in a bare metal stent, according to a presentation at the annual meeting of the
American College of Cardiology. The SISR trial had randomized 384 patients to
stenting or brachytherapy for revascularization.
At three years, 81 percent of patients who received the
stent had not required target lesion revascularization compared with 71.6 percent
of patients receiving brachytherapy. Among patients who did require target vessel
revascularization, the survival free rates were 78.2 percent for sirolimus-eluting
stent and 68.8 percent for brachytherapy.
Stent thrombosis rates, defined as definite and probable
per the Academic Research Consortium definitions, were not significantly different
(3.7 percent for the stent versus 2.6 percent for brachytherapy).
Differences in three-year rates of target vessel failure
(stent, 75.1 percent; brachytherapy, 67.9 percent) and major adverse cardiac events
did not reach statistical significance, likely reflecting progression of coronary
artery disease at sites other than the original location of bare metal stent restenosis.
Rates f major adverse events were 75.5 percent for the stent and 70.5 percent
for brachytherapy.
Patients who received the drug-eluting stent were significantly
less likely to need target lesion revascularization at three years compared to
patients who received brachytherapy. In addition, there were no significant differences
in safety endpoints, such as the rates of death, myocardial infarction, or stent
thrombosis between the two treatment arms of this study.
The original trial was designed for nine months of follow-up.
This longer-term, follow-up analysis focused on pre-specified safety endpoints,
namely death, myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis, as well as target lesion
revascularization, an efficacy endpoint, to determine whether any new safety issues
emerged and whether the major benefit of the drug-eluting stent, reduction in
repeat revascularization procedures, was maintained.
"These data continue to favor the CYPHERR Stent
compared to radiation therapy in these patients with complex coronary artery disease,"
said David R. Holmes Jr., MD, Principal Investigator and Professor of Medicine,
The Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN. "Neither treatment modality
in this study was associated with any new safety issues or concerns."
|