Coronary interventions

Clinical outcomes of bioabsorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents: two-year follow-up of the DESSOLVE III trial

EuroIntervention 2020;15:e1366-e1374. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00944

Yuki Katagiri
Yuki Katagiri1, MD; Yoshinobu Onuma2, MD, PhD; Philipp Lurz3, MD, PhD; Pawel Buszman4, MD, PhD; Jan J. Piek1, MD, PhD; Joanna J. Wykrzykowska1, MD, PhD; Taku Asano1, MD; Norihiro Kogame1, MD; Kuniaki Takahashi1, MD; Chun Chin Chang2, MD; Robbert J. de Winter1, MD, PhD; Patrick W. Serruys5, MD, PhD; William Wijns6, MD, PhD
1. Amsterdam University Medical Center, the Netherlands; 2. ThoraxCenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 3. Department of Internal Medicine/Cardiology, University of Leipzig-Heart Center, Leipzig, Germany; 4. Centre for Cardiovascular Research and Development, American Heart of Poland, Katowice, Poland; 5. The National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; 6. National University of Ireland Galway, The Lambe Institute for Translational Medicine and CURAM, Galway, Ireland

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess whether the nine months of cytostatic inhibition by crystalline sirolimus has a beneficial effect in the two-year follow-up in an all-comer population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Methods and results: The DESSOLVE III study (n=1,398) is a prospective, all-comer, multicentre, randomised controlled study (NCT02385279) allocating 703 patients to receive the MiStent drug-eluting stent with a fully absorbable polymer coating containing and embedding a microcrystalline form of sirolimus into the vessel wall, and 695 patients to receive the XIENCE durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. At two years, the device-oriented composite endpoint (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation [TLR]) occurred in 8.7% and 8.6% (p=0.958) of patients, and the patient-oriented composite endpoint (all deaths, all MI, and all revascularisations) was observed in 18.5% and 19.6% (p=0.598) of patients in the MiStent and XIENCE arms, respectively. The frequency of TV-MI and clinically indicated TLR was also comparable for both stent types. The rate of definite/probable stent thrombosis was not different in the two arms (0.9% vs 1.3%, p=0.435).

Conclusions: In an all-comer population, at two-year follow-up, the use of the MiStent sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent was at least as safe and efficacious as the XIENCE durable polymer stent. The MiStent’s potential long-term clinical benefit will be further elucidated after five years of follow-up.

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

drug-eluting stentclinical trialsstable anginaacs/nste-acs
Coronary interventionsStents and scaffolds
Read next article
Safety and performance of the second-generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS 2G) in patients with de novo coronary lesions: three-year clinical results and angiographic findings of the BIOSOLVE-II first-in-man trial

Latest news