A propensity score‐matched comparison of biodegradable polymer vs second‐generation durable polymer drug‐eluting stents in a real‐world population

摘要

Summary Aims The safety and efficacy of BP‐DES compared to second‐generation DP‐DES remain unclear in the real‐world setting. We compared the clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer drug‐eluting stents (BP‐DES) with second‐generation durable polymer drug‐eluting stents (DP‐DES) in an all‐comer percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) registry. Methods/Results The study included a cohort of 1065 patients treated with either BP‐DES or DP‐DES from January 2009 through October 2015. Propensity score matching was performed to account for potential confounders and produced 497 matched pairs of patients. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at one‐year follow‐up. The rates of TLF were comparable between BP‐DES and DP‐DES (8.7% vs 9.1%, P ?=?.823) at 1?year. The rates of stent thrombosis at 30?days (0.4% vs 0.4%, P ?=?1.00) and 1?year (0.8% vs 0.8%, P ?=?1.00) did not differ between BP‐DES and DP‐DES. There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes including target vessel failure (8.9% vs 9.5%, P ?=?.741), in‐stent restenosis (1.8% vs 1.0%, P ?=?.282), and cardiac death (6.4% vs 7.4%, P ?=?.533) at 1?year. Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that the risk of TLF at one‐year did not differ significantly between BP‐DES and DP‐DES (hazard ratio 0.94, P ?=?.763). Conclusions Efficacy and safety of BP‐DES were not better than DP‐DES at one‐year follow‐up.