Comparison of everolimus-eluting stent with paclitaxel-eluting stent in long chronic total occlusions

Abstract

The aim of the present study was the comparison of the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients treated for long chronic total occlusions (CTOs). Previous randomized trials have shown the superiority of EESs over PESs. No data exist about the efficacy and safety of EESs in patients treated for complex CTOs requiring multiple stent implantation. We identified 258 patients treated for CTOs who received multiple EESs (n = 112) or PESs (n = 146), with a total stent length of ≥40 mm. The primary end point was in-segment restenosis, defined as >50% luminal narrowing at the segment site, including the stent and 5 mm proximal and distal to the stent edges of the target vessel, on the follow-up angiogram. The secondary end point was the 9-month composite of major adverse cardiovascular events. The 2 patient groups were similar in all baseline characteristics. The median lesion length was 48 mm in the EES group and 46 mm in the PES group (p = 0.793). The incidence of the primary end point of the study was 11.8% in the EES group and 31.4% in the PES group (p = 0.001). The major adverse cardiovascular event rate was lower in the EES group than in the PES group (8.9% and 22.6%, respectively, p = 0.003). Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in 5 patients in the PES group (3.4%), with no stent thrombosis occurring in the EES group (p = 0.048). On multivariate analysis, EES was the only variable independently related to the risk of binary angiographic restenosis with an odds ratio of 0.29 (95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.62; p = 0.002). In conclusion, in patients treated for long CTOs and requiring multiple stent implantation, EESs performed better than PESs, with a >50% reduction in the risk of restenosis and major adverse cardiovascular events.