A Randomized Controlled Trial in Second-Generation Zotarolimus-Eluting Resolute Stents Versus Everolimus-Eluting Xience V Stents in Real-World Patients: The TWENTE Trial

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) (Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, California) with Xience V everolimus-eluting stents (EES) (Abbott Vascular Devices, Santa Clara, California) at 1-year follow-up.BackgroundOnly 1 randomized trial previously compared these stents.MethodsThis investigator-initiated, patient-blinded, randomized noninferiority study had limited exclusion criteria (acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions not eligible). Patients (n = 1,391; 81.4% of eligible population) were randomly assigned to ZES (n = 697) or EES (n = 694). Liberal use of stent post-dilation was encouraged. Cardiac biomarkers were systematically assessed. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to non-target vessels, and clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization. An external independent research organization performed clinical event adjudication (100% follow-up data available). Analysis was by intention-to-treat.ResultsAcute coronary syndromes were present in 52% and “off-label” feature in 77% of patients. Of the lesions, 70% were type B2/C; the post-dilation rate was very high (82%). In ZES and EES, TVF occurred in 8.2% and 8.1%, respectively (absolute risk-difference 0.1%; 95% confidence interval: −2.8% to 3.0%, pnoninferiority = 0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in TVF components. The definite-or-probable stent thrombosis rates were relatively low and similar for ZES and EES (0.9% and 1.2%, respectively, p = 0.59). Definite stent thrombosis rates were also low (0.58% and 0%, respectively, p = 0.12). In EES, probable stent thrombosis beyond day 8 was observed only in patients not adhering to dual antiplatelet therapy.ConclusionsResolute ZES were noninferior to Xience V EES in treating “real-world” patients with a vast majority of complex lesions and “off-label” indications for drug-eluting stents, which were implanted with liberal use of post-dilation. (The Real-World Endeavor Resolute Versus XIENCE V Drug-Eluting SteNt Study: Head-to-head Comparison of Clinical Outcome After Implantation of Second Generation Drug-eluting Stents in a Real World Scenario; NCT01066650)