Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Long-Term Results of Everolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Drug-Eluting Balloons in Patients With Bare-Metal In-Stent Restenosis: 3-Year Follow-Up of the RIBS V Clinical Trial.
Authors: Alfonso, Fernando
Pérez-Vizcayno, María José
García Del Blanco, Bruno
Otaegui, Imanol
Masotti, Mónica
Zueco, Javier
Veláquez, Maite
Sanchís, Juan
García-Touchard, Arturo
Lázaro-García, Rosa
Moreu, José
Bethencourt, Armando
Cuesta, Javier
Rivero, Fernando
Cárdenas, Alberto
Gonzalo, Nieves
Jiménez-Quevedo, Pilar
Fernández, Cristina
RIBS V Study Investigators
Keywords: drug-eluting balloon(s);drug-eluting stent(s);everolimus-eluting stent(s);in-stent restenosis
metadata.dc.subject.mesh: Aged
Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary
Cardiac Catheters
Cardiovascular Agents
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Disease
Coronary Restenosis
Drug-Eluting Stents
Middle Aged
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Prospective Studies
Prosthesis Design
Risk Factors
Surveys and Questionnaires
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Issue Date: 20-Jun-2016
Abstract: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term efficacy of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and drug-eluting balloons (DEB) in patients with bare-metal stent in-stent restenosis (ISR). The relative long-term clinical efficacy of current therapeutic modalities in patients with ISR remains unknown. The 3-year clinical follow-up (pre-specified endpoint) of patients included in the RIBS V (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare-Metal Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation) randomized clinical trial was analyzed. All patients were followed yearly using a pre-defined structured questionnaire. A total of 189 patients with bare-metal stent ISR were allocated to either EES (n = 94) or DEB (n = 95). Clinical follow-up at 1, 2, and 3 years was obtained in all patients (100%). Compared with patients treated with DEB, those treated with EES obtained better angiographic results, including larger minimal luminal diameter at follow-up (primary study endpoint; 2.36 ± 0.6 mm vs. 2.01 ± 0.6 mm; p 1 year) target vessel (3 [3.2%] vs. 3 [3.2%]; p = 0.95) and target lesion (1 [1%] vs. 2 [2.1%]; p = 0.54) revascularization was low and similar in the 2 arms. Rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis (1% vs. 0%) were also similar in the 2 arms. The 3-year clinical follow-up of the RIBS V clinical trial confirms the sustained safety and efficacy of EES and DEB in patients treated for bare-metal stent ISR. In this setting, EES reduce the need for target lesion revascularization at very long-term follow-up. (RIBS V [Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent] [RIBS V]; NCT01239953).
metadata.dc.identifier.doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.03.037
Appears in Collections:Producción 2020

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

This item is protected by original copyright

Except where otherwise noted, Items on the Andalusian Health Repository site are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License.