<< SBS, ALA merger awaits membership approval | Metabolic drugs top the list of prescription drug expenses for elderly Medicare beneficiaries >>
Read in | English | Español | Français | Deutsch | Português | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 简体中文 | 繁體中文 | Nederlands | Norsk | Русский | Svenska | Polski

CYPHER Sirolimus-eluting Coronary Stent provides better outcome compared to Medtronic’s Endeavor Stent

Published on March 16, 2010 at 1:57 AM · No Comments

Investigators reported the long-term follow-up of the largest randomized comparison between the CYPHER® Sirolimus-eluting Coronary Stent and Medtronic’s Endeavor® Stent highlighting significant and sustained clinical differences. These important findings were presented at the American College of Cardiology annual meeting, (ACC 2010) in Atlanta and published on-line in the prestigious journal The Lancet. The CYPHER® Stent was associated with significantly lower rates of death, myocardial infarction (heart attack), and repeat revascularization (the need for another procedure) than the Endeavor® Stent out to 18 months. This study adds to the unmatched body of safety and efficacy data on the CYPHER® Stent with this comparison to the more recently approved Endeavor® Stent in a contemporary setting.

“We continue to be gratified by the outstanding performance of CYPHER® compared with other drug-eluting stents. The breadth of clinical safety and efficacy data and the long-term follow-up data on patient outcomes associated with the CYPHER® Stent are unmatched by the competition, and this gap continues to widen”

The large randomized trial SORT OUT III included more than 2,300 patients across a wide range of lesion and patient complexity. The investigators reported that the mortality rate (4.4% for Endeavor® vs. 2.7% for CYPHER®: p<0.035), incidence of heart attacks (2.1% for Endeavor® vs. 0.9 % for CYPHER®: p<0.029), and composite endpoint of MACE (9.7 % for Endeavor® vs. 4.5 % for CYPHER®: p<0.0001) was significantly lower in patients receiving CYPHER® compared to those receiving Endeavor®. The incidence of “definite” late stent thrombosis was higher for Endeavor® than for CYPHER®, but this difference was not statistically significant (1.1% for Endeavor® vs. 0.5% for CYPHER®: p<0.13). Coupled with the safety advantage observed with CYPHER®, there was an efficacy advantage as well: CYPHER® had significantly less frequent ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization through 18 months compared to Endeavor® (1.7% for CYPHER® vs. 6.1% Endeavor®: p<0.0001).

Comments
The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News-Medical.Net.



  Country flag

biuquote
  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading