Safety and efficacy comparison between rapamycin-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer or permanent polymer in patients with coronary artery disease.
- Author:
Yu-xiao ZHANG
1
;
Cai-yi LU
;
Qiao XUE
;
Peng LIU
;
Wei YAN
;
Xing-li WU
;
Rui CHEN
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Absorbable Implants; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Coronary Artery Disease; therapy; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Graft Occlusion, Vascular; epidemiology; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Polymers; Prospective Studies; Sirolimus; administration & dosage; Stents
- From: Chinese Journal of Cardiology 2006;34(11):971-974
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo evaluate the safety and efficacy of rapamycin-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer (EXCEL) or permanent polymer (Cypher) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODSIn this prospective, non-random and comparative study, 60 patients with CAD were divided into EXCEL group (n = 32) and Cypher group (n = 28). The coronary angiography (CAG) and stenting procedure were identical. The safety and efficacy of EXCEL stent was evaluated by major adverse cardiac events (MACE), restenosis rate and percent diameter stenosis rate as well as late luminal loss (LLL) at six months post stenting.
RESULTSDuring follow-up (mean: 6.04 +/- 2.12 months), there was no MACE in the two groups. Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) data at 6.0 +/- 2.1 months post stenting were available in 27 patients (84.38%) in EXCEL group and 10 patients (35.71%) in Cypher group. Restenosis rate was zero in both groups. Percent diameter stenosis rate (5.98% +/- 5.52% vs. 5.21% +/- 6.3%) and LLL (-0.02 +/- 0.09 mm vs. -0.01 +/- 0.07 mm) were similar between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONSEXCEL stent was safe for the treatment of CAD and comparable as Cypher stent in preventing MACE and restenosis at 6 months post stenting.
