Everolimus and sirolimus releasing new-generation coronary stents have been shown to reduce the risk of restenosis. However, efficacy and safety between the two types of stents in terms of end points is unclear. Similar outcomes have been reported in several recent randomized trials comparing everolimuseluting stent (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stent (SES).
In this study, a retrospective cohort study was done in the patients who underwent stent implantation using SES or EES. Comparison between SES and EES was done in patients who presented for follow up in our cardiology department over one year after their angioplasty. The study was carried out for evaluating non-inferiority of EES as compared to SES in terms of late ST and ISR requiring TRL. Out of the total 136 patients, 60 had SES implantation and 76 had EES implantation. All of these patients were subjected to coronary angiography after 1 year to look for patency of the stent. In-stent restenosis (outcome) was found in 3 patients in SES group and 4 patients in EES group respectively. All 7 patients who had ISR were suffering from diabetes and hypertension. Association between diabetes & ISR (Chi square= 5.488; p= 0.01; considering 95% CI) and hypertension & ISR (Chi square= 6.756; p= 0.00) is significant. While comparing the two stents: Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents with the outcome i.e., in-stent restenosis and target lesion revascularisation (Chi square= 0.005; p= 0.94) with 95% CI, no significant difference between the two stents was found. Hence the null hypothesis, that there is no significant difference between use of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents on clinical and angiographic follow up is accepted.
At the end of 12 months, everolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to and had similar results to SES implantation in terms of clinical and angiographic outcome in a population of patients who had minimalexclusion criteria.
Everolimus, Sirolimus, Stent, Restenosis, Thrombosis
