Long-term safety and efficacy of sirolimus- vs. paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: 3-year follow-up of the PROSIT trial

BackgroundMeta-analysis of randomized trials showed superior efficacy and similar safety of drug-eluting stent over bare-metal stent in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. However, long-term relative outcomes of sirolimus- (SES) vs. paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) have not been fully evaluated in randomized studies. This study compared long-term safety and efficacy of these two stents in STEMI.MethodsA total of 308 STEMI patients were randomly treated with SES (n = 154) or PES (n = 154). Three-year clinical outcomes were assessed. Primary outcome of interest was incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Secondary outcome of interest was occurrence of very late stent thrombosis.ResultsBoth groups had similar baseline characteristics. During follow-up, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of death (6.5% for SES and 10.4% for PES, p = 0.22), MI (2.6% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.75), stent thrombosis (1.9% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.72), TVR (3.9% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.15) and MACE (12.3% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.12). Eight patients in overall population had stent thrombosis: definite 3, probable 1, and possible 4. Cumulative incidence of stent thrombosis was gradually increased; 0.6% at 30 days, 0.6% at 1 year, 1.6% at 2 years, and 2.6% at 3 years. Very late stent thrombosis, definite or probable, occurred in 0.6% for both.ConclusionAmong non-selected STEMI patients who underwent primary angioplasty, both SES and PES might be safe and SES showed similar three-year clinical outcomes compared to PES.