Comparison of Titanium-Nitride-Oxide–Coated stents with Zotarolimus-Eluting stents for coronary revascularization: a randomized controlled trial
Pilgrim, ThomasDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Räber, LorenzDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Limacher, AndreasClinical Trials Unit, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Löffel, LukasDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Wenaweser, PeterDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Cook, StéphaneDepartment of Medicine, Cardiology unit, University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Stauffer, Jean-ChristopheDepartment of Medicine, Cardiology unit, University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Togni, MarioDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Vogel, RolfDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Garachemani, AliDepartment of Cardiology, Clinic Sonnenhof, Bern, Switzerland
Moschovitis, ArisDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Khattab, Ahmed A.Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Seiler, ChristianDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Meier, BernhardDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Jüni, PeterClinical Trials Unit, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland - Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Switzerland
Windecker, StephanDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland - Clinical Trials Unit, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
English
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; pnoninferiority = 0.54), and subsequent superiority testing was in favor of ZES (psuperiority = 0.02). In-segment binary restenosis was lower with ZES (11.1%) than with TiNO (20.5%; psuperiority = 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; pinteraction = 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)