首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American College of Cardiology >Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting stents with sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization: the ZEST (comparison of the efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stent with sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stent for coronary lesions) randomized trial.
【24h】

Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting stents with sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization: the ZEST (comparison of the efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stent with sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stent for coronary lesions) randomized trial.

机译:佐他莫司洗脱支架与西罗莫司洗脱支架和紫杉醇洗脱支架在冠状动脉血运重建中的比较:ZEST(佐罗莫司洗脱支架与西罗莫司洗脱支架和紫杉醇洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉病变的疗效和安全性比较)随机试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) in comparison with the established and widely used sirolimus- (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in routine clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Whether ZES might provide similar clinical and angiographic outcomes in a broad spectrum of patients compared with SES or PES is undetermined. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, multicenter, prospectively randomized trial to compare ZES with SES and PES in 2,645 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) at 12 months. A noninferiority comparison (ZES vs. SES) and a superiority comparison (ZES vs. PES) were performed for the primary end point. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the 3 groups. At 12 months, the ZES group showed noninferior rates of MACE compared with the SES group (10.2% vs. 8.3%, p for noninferiority = 0.01, p for superiority = 0.17) and significantly fewer MACE than the PES group (10.2% vs. 14.1%, p for superiority = 0.01). The incidence of death or myocardial infarction was similar among the groups (ZES vs. SES vs. PES, 5.8% vs. 6.9% vs. 7.6%, respectively, p = 0.31). The incidence of stent thrombosis was significantly lower in the SES group (ZES vs. SES vs. PES, 0.7% vs. 0% vs. 0.8%, respectively, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this large-scale, practical randomized trial, the use of ZES resulted in similar rates of MACE compared with SES and in fewer MACE compared with PES at 12 months. (Comparison of the Efficacy and the Safety of Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Sirolimus-Eluting Stent and PacliTaxel-Eluting Stent for Coronary Lesions; NCT00418067).
机译:目的:本研究的目的是评估佐他莫司洗脱支架(ZES)与常规临床实践中已广泛使用的西罗莫司(SES)和紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)的相对疗效和安全性。背景:与SES或PES相比,ZES是否可以在广泛的患者中提供相似的临床和血管造影结果。方法:我们进行了一项单盲,多中心,前瞻性随机试验,以比较2645例接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者中的ZES与SES和PES。主要终点是在12个月时发生的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)(死亡,心肌梗塞和局部缺血性靶血管血运重建)的综合结果。对主要终点进行了非劣效性比较(ZES与SES)和优势比较(ZES与PES)。结果:3组基线临床和血管造影特征相似。与SES组相比,ZES组在12个月时显示出MACE的劣等率(10.2%vs. 8.3%,非劣效性的p = 0.01,优势p = 0.17),而MACE明显少于PES组(10.2%vs. Ps)。 14.1%,优势p = 0.01)。各组之间的死亡或心肌梗塞发生率相似(ZES vs. SES vs. PES,分别为5.8%,6.9%和7.6%,p = 0.31)。 SES组中支架血栓形成的发生率显着降低(ZES vs. SES vs. PES,分别为0.7%,0%和0.8%,p = 0.02)。结论:在这项大规模,实用的随机试验中,在12个月时,ZES的使用导致MACE的发生率与SES相似,而MACE的发生率低于PES。 (佐他莫司洗脱支架与西罗莫司洗脱支架和帕克他赛尔洗脱支架对冠状动脉病变的疗效和安全性比较; NCT00418067)。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号