Background: Sirolimus-eluting stents markedly reduce the risk of restenosis compared with bare metal stents. However, it is not known whether there are differences in effectiveness between bare metal and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with total coronary occlusions.
Methods and results: In a prospective, randomized, single-blind, 2-center trial, we enrolled 200 patients with total coronary occlusions: Half (n = 100) were randomly assigned to receive bare metal BxVelocity stents and half (n = 100) to receive sirolimus-eluting Cypher stents. The primary end point was angiographic binary in-segment restenosis rate at 6-month follow-up. Secondary end points were a composite of major adverse cardiac events, target vessel failure, binary in-stent restenosis rate, in-stent and in-segment minimal lumen diameter, percent diameter stenosis, and late luminal loss at 6-month follow-up. The sirolimus stent group showed a significantly lower in-stent binary restenosis rate of 7% compared with 36% in the bare metal stent group (P < 0.001). The in-segment binary restenosis rate was 11% in the group receiving a sirolimus stent versus 41% in the bare metal stent group (P < 0.0001), resulting in a target lesion revascularization rate of 4% in the sirolimus group versus 19% in the bare metal group (P < 0.001). Patients who received the drug-eluting stent also had significantly lower rates of target vessel revascularization, target vessel failure, and all major adverse cardiac events.
Conclusions: In patients with total coronary occlusions, use of the sirolimus-eluting stents are superior to the bare metal stents with significant reduction in angiographic binary restenosis, resulting in significantly less need for target lesion and target vessel revascularization.