The twelve-month outcome of biolimus eluting stent with biodegradable polymer compared with an everolimus eluting stent with durable polymer.

INTRODUCTION Drug-eluting stents (DES) have significantly decreased the need for repeat coronary revascularization but concerns remain regarding the safety of first and second generation DES. We compared the safety and efficacy of a biolimus-eluting stent (with biodegradable polymer) with an everolimus-eluting stent (with durable polymer) one. METHODS We performed a randomized trial to compare the two types of stents. Two hundred patients undergoing PCI for de novo lesions were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with either biolimus-eluting (BioMatrix) or everolimus -eluting (Xience V) stent. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization within 12 months. RESULTS Demographics, clinical, and lesion characteristic were comparable between two groups. The 30-day major adverse car-diac event (MACE) rate was 2% in BioMatrix group versus 0% in Xience group (p > 0.05). After 12 months, the rates of cardiac death (0% in both groups), MI (2% versus 0%, p=0.49) and clinically -driven target vessel revascularization (0% in both groups) were similar for BioMatrix and Xience. No stent thrombosis was reported at 1, 6, 9 or 12 months after intervention in either group. CONCLUSION BES (Biolimus-eluting stent) with biodegradable polymer and EES (Everolimus-eluting stent) with durable polymer appear similar with respect to MACE and stent thrombosis in this patient population. Many studies with longer follow up are needed to define better the role of BES with biodegradable polymer in treatment of coronary artery lesions.