Sirolimus- vs. paclitaxel-eluting stents for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: complete 2-year follow-up of a two-center registry

Abstract

Background: The feasibility of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents and its comparability with bypass surgery in treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis has been shown previously. We compared the mid-to long-term outcome between sirolimus-(SES) vs. paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in an all-comer analysis that included all patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis who underwent PCI with SES or PES.

Methods: From March 2003 and June 2007, 196 patients underwent PCI with SES or PES for unprotected LMCA stenosis at Seoul National University Main or Bundang Hospital; SES was implanted in 141 patients and PES in 55 patients. The baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were mostly similar between the SES and PES group.

Results: After 2 years of follow-up, there were no differences in the rate of cardiac death (9.1% vs. 8.5%) and nonfatal MI (5.5% vs. 2.8%) between the two groups. However, the risk of repeat revascularization tended to be lower in the SES group compared with the PES group [TLR, 9.9% vs. 20.0% (P=0.06); TVR, 17.7% vs. 30.9% (P=0.05)], which did not reach statistical significance. The rate of stent thrombosis (ST) was also similar between the two groups (3.6% vs. 2.1% for definite ST, 3.6% vs. 2.8% for definite+probable ST).

Conclusions: In all-comers undergoing first generation DES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis, PES and SES showed comparable 2-year clinical results regarding hard endpoints and major adverse cardiac events.