LAUSR

Background Head to head trials of clinical outcomes of sirolimus eluting polymer free vs. biodegradable polymer stents are lacking. Methods Single centre prospective open labeled randomised controlled clinical trial. Basis for sample size calculation was the rate of MACE from the ISAR TEST 3 trial in which the absolute difference was 10.25% with a standard deviation of 0.24. Assuming null hypothesis, 80% power and 5% alpha error, to detect a 10% difference, adjusting for 10% loss of follow up, sample size was 204. Inclusion criteria: Patients with stable coronary artery disease or recent acute coronary syndrome ( >1 week from the date of STEMI), being taken up for elective angioplasty. End points: Primary end point was MACE at 1 year and secondary end points at the end of 1 year were cardiac death, urgent target lesion revascularization, acute coronary syndrome, stroke and in-stent re-stenosis. Results 204 patients were enrolled between January 2013 to July 2014, 91 in the polymer-free group and 113 in the biodegradable polymer group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups. 21 patients (10.29%), were lost to follow up. MACE at 1 year were comparable in both the groups 3 of 85(3.52%) in the polymer-free group and 3 of 98(3.06%) in the biodegradable polymer group, p = 0.859. The secondary end points were also comparable between the two groups- Death- 1 of 85(1.17%) vs. 2 of 98(2.04%), p = 0.646, Stroke 0 of 85 vs. 2 of 98(2.04%), p = 0.185 and acute coronary syndrome – 2 of 85(2.35%) vs. 1 of 98(1.02%), p = 0.204. There were no instances of urgent target lesion re-vascularisation or definite stent thrombosis in either groups. In stent re-stenosis was found in 7 of 85(8.2%) in the polymer-free group vs. 6 of 98(6.12%) in the biodegradable polymer group. Conclusion The 1 year MACE rates are comparable in patients who underwent elective coronary revascularization using sirolimus eluting polymer-free and biodegradable polymer stents.