Author + information
- Received November 28, 2011
- Revision received May 3, 2012
- Accepted May 9, 2012
- Published online July 1, 2012.
- Young-Hak Kim, MD, PhD⁎,
- Duk-Woo Park, MD, PhD⁎,
- Jung-Min Ahn, MD⁎,
- Sung-Cheol Yun, PhD⁎,
- Hae Geun Song, MD⁎,
- Jong-Young Lee, MD⁎,
- Won-Jang Kim, MD, PhD⁎,
- Soo-Jin Kang, MD, PhD⁎,
- Seung-Whan Lee, MD, PhD⁎,
- Cheol Whan Lee, MD, PhD⁎,
- Seong-Wook Park, MD, PhD⁎,
- Yangsoo Jang, MD, PhD†,
- Myung-Ho Jeong, MD, PhD‡,
- Hyo-Soo Kim, MD, PhD§,
- Seung-Ho Hur, MD, PhD∥,
- Seung-Woon Rha, MD, PhD¶,
- Do-Sun Lim, MD, PhD#,
- Sung-Ho Her, MD, PhD⁎⁎,
- Ki Bae Seung, MD, PhD††,
- In-Whan Seong, MD, PhD‡‡,
- Seung-Jung Park, MD, PhD⁎,⁎ (, )
- PRECOMBAT-2 Investigators
- ↵⁎Reprint requests and correspondence:
Dr. Seung-Jung Park, Heart Institute, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan, Songpa-gu, Seoul 138-736, South Korea
Objectives This study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis.
Background The clinical benefit of second-generation DES for ULMCA stenosis has not been determined.
Methods The authors assessed 334 consecutive patients who received everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for ULMCA stenosis between 2009 and 2010. The 18-month incidence rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR), were compared with those of a randomized study comparing patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (n = 327) or coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) (n = 272).
Results EES (8.9%) showed a comparable incidence of MACCE as SES (10.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] of EES: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51 to 1.40; p = 0.51) and CABG (6.7%, aHR of EES: 1.40; 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.54; p = 0.26). The composite incidence of death, MI, or stroke also did not differ among patients receiving EES (3.3%), SES (3.7%; aHR of EES: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.47; p = 0.29), and CABG (4.8%; aHR of EES: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.54; p = 0.34). However, the incidence of ischemia-driven TVR in the EES group (6.5%) was higher than in the CABG group (2.6%, aHR of EES: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.17 to 6.58; p = 0.02), but comparable to SES (8.2%, aHR of EES: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.64 to 2.06; p = 0.65). Angiographic restenosis rates were similar in the SES and EES groups (13.8% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.16).
Conclusions Second-generation EES had a similar 18-month risk of MACCE for ULMCA stenosis as first-generation SES or CABG. (Evaluation of Outcomes of EES Implantation for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis [PRECOMBAT-2]; NCT01348022)
This study was supported by funds from the Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California, Healthcare Technology R&D Project, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (A102065) and Cardiovascular Research Foundation. Dr. S. J. Park has received research grants from Cordis and Abbott. Dr. Y. H. Kim has received honoraria from Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
- Received November 28, 2011.
- Revision received May 3, 2012.
- Accepted May 9, 2012.
- American College of Cardiology Foundation