Comparison of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated stents with zotarolimus-eluting stents for coronary revascularization a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES This study sought to compare the efficacy of passive stent coating with titanium-nitride-oxide (TiNO) with drug-eluting stents releasing zotarolimus (ZES) (Endeavor, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota). BACKGROUND Stent coating with TiNO has been shown to reduce restenosis compared with bare-metal stents in experimental and clinical studies. METHODS In an assessor-blind noninferiority study, 302 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to treatment with TiNO or ZES. The primary endpoint was in-stent late loss at 6 to 8 months, and analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS Both groups were well balanced with respect to baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. The TiNO group failed to reach the pre-specified noninferiority margin for the primary endpoint (in-stent late loss: 0.64 ± 0.61 mm vs. 0.47 ± 0.48 mm, difference: 0.16, upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26; p(noninferiority) = 0.54), and subsequent superiority testing was in favor of ZES (p(superiority) = 0.02). In-segment binary restenosis was lower with ZES (11.1%) than with TiNO (20.5%; p(superiority) = 0.04). A stratified analysis of the primary endpoint found particularly pronounced differences between stents among diabetic versus nondiabetic patients (0.90 ± 0.69 mm vs. 0.39 ± 0.38 mm; p(interaction) = 0.04). Clinical outcomes showed a similar rate of death (0.7% vs. 0.7%; p = 1.00), myocardial infarction (5.3% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.60), and major adverse cardiac events (21.1% vs. 18.0%, hazard ratio: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.00; p = 0.50) at 1 year. There were no differences in rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 0%; p = 0.51) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS Compared with TiNO, ZES was superior with regard to late loss and binary restenosis. The concept of passive stent coating with TiNO remains inferior to drug-eluting stent technology in reducing restenosis. ([TIDE] Randomized Trial Comparing Titan Stent With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent: NCT00492908).

[1]  Patrick W Serruys,et al.  Coronary-artery stents. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  P. Fitzgerald,et al.  Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study of the Endeavor Zotarolimus-Eluting Phosphorylcholine-Encapsulated Stent for Treatment of Native Coronary Artery Lesions: Clinical and Angiographic Results of the ENDEAVOR II Trial , 2006, Circulation.

[3]  P. Teirstein,et al.  Localized intracoronary gamma-radiation therapy to inhibit the recurrence of restenosis after stenting. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

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

[5]  M. Jeong,et al.  Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting stents with sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization: the ZEST (comparison of the efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stent with sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stent for coronary lesions) randomized trial. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  J. Moses,et al.  Sirolimus-eluting stents vs. standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery , 2004 .

[7]  Gregg W Stone,et al.  Outcomes with the polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent in patients with diabetes mellitus: the TAXUS-IV trial. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  M. S. Williams,et al.  Stent and artery geometry determine intimal thickening independent of arterial injury. , 2000, Circulation.

[9]  A. Kastrati,et al.  [Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results Strut Thickness Effect on Restenosis Outcome (ISAR-STEREO) Trial]. , 2012, Vestnik rentgenologii i radiologii.

[10]  P. Fitzgerald,et al.  Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with native coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[12]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials , 2010, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  J. Ruiz-Nodar,et al.  Direct coronary stenting versus stenting with balloon pre-dilation: immediate and follow-up results of a multicentre, prospective, randomized study. The DISCO trial. DIrect Stenting of COronary Arteries. , 2002, European heart journal.

[14]  Simon Wandel,et al.  Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis , 2007, The Lancet.

[15]  B. Gersh Biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer versus sirolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer for coronary revascularisation (LEADERS): a randomised non-inferiority trial , 2009 .

[16]  Ousa,et al.  A RANDOMIZED COMPARISON OF A SIROLIMUS-ELUTING STENT WITH A STANDARD STENT FOR CORONARY REVASCULARIZATION , 2002 .

[17]  Jeffrey W Moses,et al.  Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  A. Kastrati,et al.  Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Strut Thickness Effect on Restenosis Outcome (ISAR-STEREO) Trial , 2001, Circulation.

[19]  F. Eberli,et al.  Randomized Comparison of a Titanium-Nitride-Oxide–Coated Stent With a Stainless Steel Stent for Coronary Revascularization: The TiNOX Trial , 2005, Circulation.

[20]  A. Becker,et al.  Neointimal tissue response at sites of coronary stenting in humans: macroscopic, histological, and immunohistochemical analyses. , 1998, Circulation.

[21]  R. Whitbourn,et al.  First-in-human study of the Endeavor ABT-578-eluting phosphorylcholine-encapsulated stent system in de novo native coronary artery lesions: Endeavor I Trial. , 2005, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

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

[23]  O. Hess,et al.  Stent Coating With Titanium-Nitride-Oxide for Reduction of Neointimal Hyperplasia , 2001, Circulation.

[24]  P. Fitzgerald,et al.  A randomized comparison of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent versus the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent in de novo native coronary lesions 12-month outcomes from the ENDEAVOR IV trial. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[25]  Patrick W. Serruys,et al.  A randomized comparison of a sirolimus eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization , 2002 .

[26]  K. Kuck,et al.  Safety of direct stenting with the Endeavor stent: results of the Endeavor II continued access registry. , 2007, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[27]  Gregg W. Stone,et al.  A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease , 2004 .

[28]  Hae-Young Lee,et al.  Does "late catch-up" exist in drug-eluting stents: insights from a serial quantitative coronary angiography analysis of sirolimus versus paclitaxel-eluting stents. , 2010, American heart journal.

[29]  M. Zwahlen,et al.  Incidence and correlates of drug-eluting stent thrombosis in routine clinical practice. 4-year results from a large 2-institutional cohort study. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[30]  J. Moses,et al.  Improved late clinical safety with zotarolimus-eluting stents compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with de novo coronary lesions: 3-year follow-up from the ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) trial. , 2010, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.