Second vs. first-generation drug-eluting stents in complex lesions subsets: 3 years' follow-up of ERACI IV study.

BACKGROUND: Although percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES-1) did not show a benefit in terms of death rate and myocardial infarction (MI) compared to bypass surgery (coronary artery bypass graft [CABG]), DES platforms have seen a remarkable improvement in the last few years, and a significant increase in their safety and efficacy was observed in randomized controlled trials and observational studies in comparison with DES-1 in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). One-year results from the ERACI IV registry using a second-generation DES (DES-2) demonstrated significantly greater efficacy and safety in patients with multiple vessel CAD, including diabetics, compared to DES-1. Long-term results are yet unknown.

METHODS: The ERACI IV registry was a multicenter, prospective and controlled open-label study conducted in 9 sites in Argentina during 2013 and 2014, which evaluated a DES-2 for the treatment of patients with multiple vessel CAD including unprotected left main disease (ULMD) and diabetes. The primary endpoint was to compare the composite of death of any cause, MI and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) as hard endpoints with ERACI III DES-1 arm. Secondary endpoints included each component of the primary endpoint and target vessel revascularization (TVR) as major adverse cardiovascular events (MACCE) and stent thrombosis. We include a modified Syntax Score (SS) taking in account functional revascularization, treating lesions ≥70% in vessels ≥ 2.00 mm, whereas severe lesions in vessels < 2.0 mm and intermediate lesions were not rated.

RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, with higher numbers of diabetics and 3-vessel/ULMD (P=0.02 and P=0.003, respectively) in ERACI IV. At 34.7 months' follow-up, the incidence of the composite of death/MI/CVA between ERACI IV and ERACI III (4.9% vs. 13.7%, P<0.001); unplanned new revascularization (5.3% vs. 14.2%, P<0.001) and MACCE (9.3% vs. 22.7%, P<0.001), were significantly lower in ERACI IV DES-2. MACCE rate was similar in diabetics, (5.8%) and nondiabetics (7.0%). After performing a matched propensity score, MACCE remain significantly lower in ERACI IV (P = 0.005). Incidence of stent thrombosis was lower although not significantly between groups, (0.9% vs. 3.1% in ERACI IV and III, respectively; P=0.13).

CONCLUSIONS: The use of DES-2 in patients with complex lesions subsets together with a functional PCI strategy were associated with a remarkable low incidence of adverse events at 3 years' follow-up and the benefit was also seen in in diabetic population. Late outcome of this study strongly validated our lesion PCI scoring and assessment.