The Official Journal of EuroPCR and the European Association of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (EAPCI)

CORONARY INTERVENTIONS

Randomised comparison of a biodegradable polymer ultra-thin sirolimus-eluting stent versus a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions: the meriT-V trial

EuroIntervention 2018;14:e1207-e1214 published online September 2018 published online e-edition December 2018. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00762

1. Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia, Sao Paulo, Brazil; 2. University Clinic of Cardiology, Skopje, FYR of Macedonia; 3. Isala Hospital, Zwolle, the Netherlands; 4. Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, United Kingdom; 5. Latvian Research Institute of Cardiology, Riga, Latvia; 6. ICRC, St. Anne’s University Hospital, Brno, Czech Republic; 7. University Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; 8. Manchester Heart Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom; 9. Heart Institute-InCor, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; 10. American Heart of Poland S.A., Katowice, Poland; 11. Eurolatino Pesquisas Médicas, Uberlândia, Brazil; 12. New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the BioMime sirolimus-eluting coronary stent (SES) compared to the XIENCE family of everolimus-eluting coronary stents (EES) in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions.

Methods and results: The meriT-V is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 256 patients with up to two de novo native coronary artery lesions were enrolled and randomly assigned (2:1) to BioMime SES or XIENCE EES. BioMime SES was non-inferior to XIENCE EES for the primary endpoint of in-stent late lumen loss (0.15±0.27 mm vs. 0.15±0.29 mm; difference: -0.006 mm; 95% confidence interval: -0.085 to 0.072; p=0.87; p for non-inferiority <0.0001) at nine-month follow-up. The major adverse cardiac events rate was numerically lower in the BioMime SES group (2.98% vs. 7.14%; p=0.13), driven by a statistically significant lower risk of any myocardial infarction (0.60% vs. 4.76%; p=0.03), when compared with the XIENCE EES group. There was no difference in target vessel myocardial infarction (p=0.62) between the groups. There was no definite or probable stent thrombosis in either group.

Conclusions: In the treatment of de novo native coronary artery lesions, the biodegradable polymer ultra-thin SES (BioMime) was non-inferior to a durable polymer EES (XIENCE) at nine-month follow-up. Further studies powered for clinical endpoints are needed.

Sign in to read and download the full article

Forgot your password?
No account yet? Sign up for free!
Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com

Read next article

Intravascular ultrasound findings of the Fantom sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold at six- and nine-month follow-up: the FANTOM II study