A prospective, randomized evaluation of a novel everolimus-eluting coronary stent: the PLATINUM (a Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Trial to Assess an Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System [PROMUS Element] for the Treatment of Up to Two de Novo Coronary Artery Lesions) trial.

OBJECTIVES We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes with a novel platinum chromium everolimus-eluting stent (PtCr-EES) compared with a predicate cobalt chromium everolimus-eluting stent (CoCr-EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND Randomized trials have demonstrated an excellent safety and efficacy profile for the CoCr-EES. The PtCr-EES uses the identical antiproliferative agent and polymer but with a novel platinum chromium scaffold designed for enhanced deliverability, vessel conformability, side-branch access, radiopacity, radial strength, and fracture resistance. METHODS A total of 1,530 patients undergoing PCI of 1 or 2 de novo native lesions were randomized at 132 worldwide sites to CoCr-EES (n = 762) or PtCr-EES (n = 768). The primary endpoint was the 12-month rate of target lesion failure (TLF), the composite of target vessel-related cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in the per-protocol population (patients who received ≥1 assigned study stent), powered for noninferiority. RESULTS The 12-month rate of TLF in the per-protocol population occurred in 2.9% versus 3.4% of patients assigned to CoCr-EES versus PtCr-EES, respectively (difference: 0.5%, 95% confidence interval: -1.3% to 2.3%, p(noninferiority) = 0.001, p(superiority) = 0.60). By intention-to-treat, there were no significant differences between CoCr-EES and PtCr-EES in the 12-month rates of TLF (3.2% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.72), cardiac death or MI (2.5% vs. 2.0%, p = 0.56), TLR (1.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.96), or Academic Research Consortium definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.4% vs. 0.4%, p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS In this large-scale, prospective, single-blind randomized trial, a novel PtCr-EES was noninferior to the predicate CoCr-EES for TLF, with nonsignificant differences in measures of safety and efficacy through 12-month follow-up after PCI.

[1]  San-Yuan Chen,et al.  Surface characteristics and hemocompatibility of PAN/PVDF blend membranes , 2005 .

[2]  P. Fitzgerald,et al.  Comparison of an everolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized trial. , 2008, JAMA.

[3]  J. Palmaz,et al.  Influence of topography on endothelialization of stents: clues for new designs. , 2000, Journal of long-term effects of medical implants.

[4]  R. Virmani,et al.  Oral Everolimus Inhibits In-Stent Neointimal Growth , 2002, Circulation.

[5]  R. Virmani,et al.  Endothelial cell recovery between comparator polymer-based drug-eluting stents. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  Gregg W Stone,et al.  Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in coronary artery disease. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  G. Stone,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound assessment of cobalt chromium versus stainless steel drug-eluting stent expansion. , 2010, The American journal of cardiology.

[8]  P. Teirstein,et al.  PLATINUM QCA: a prospective, multicentre study assessing clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound outcomes with the novel platinum chromium thin-strut PROMUS Element everolimus-eluting stent in de novo coronary stenoses. , 2011, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[9]  P. Serruys,et al.  A randomised comparison of an everolimus-eluting coronary stent with a paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent:the SPIRIT II trial. , 2006, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[10]  P. Smits,et al.  Second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice (COMPARE): a randomised trial , 2010, The Lancet.

[11]  P. Serruys,et al.  Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions , 2007, Circulation.

[12]  Jui-Che Lin,et al.  Surface characterization and platelet adhesion studies on fluorocarbons prepared by plasma-induced graft polymerization , 2000, Journal of biomaterials science. Polymer edition.

[13]  Volker Klauss,et al.  Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting coronary stents. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  I. Menown,et al.  The platinum chromium element stent platform: from alloy, to design, to clinical practice , 2010, Advances in therapy.

[15]  W. Carroll,et al.  A platinum-chromium steel for cardiovascular stents. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[16]  R. Starzyk,et al.  Vascular response to a third generation everolimus-eluting stent. , 2010, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[17]  P. Serruys,et al.  One-year results of a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in de novo coronary narrowings (The SPIRIT FIRST Trial). , 2005, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[18]  Jan J Piek,et al.  A randomized comparison of a durable polymer Everolimus-eluting stent with a bare metal coronary stent: The SPIRIT first trial. , 2005, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.