High bleeding risk: is BMS still justifiable?

Original Title: Is Bare-Metal Stent Implantation Still Justifiable in High Bleeding Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? A Pre-Specified Analysis From the ZEUS Trial. Reference: Sara Ariotti et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2016;9(5):426-436.

 

This work studied ischemic and bleeding events in high bleeding risk patients randomized to the zotarolimus eluting stent (ZEZ) Endeavor vs. conventional bare metal stents (BMS), followed by dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with both stable and unstable coronary artery disease.

Drug eluting stents are controversial in patients with high bleeding risk since prolonged DATP may poses safety concerns.

The ZEUS trial (Zotarolimus-Eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates) was a multicenter, randomized and simple blind trial including 828 high bleeding risk patients randomized to ZES vs. BMS followed by 30 days of DAPT.

Primary end point was a combination of death, MI and revascularization at 12 months that occurred in 22.6% of patients in the ZES group vs 29% of patients in the BMS group (HR: 0.75; CI 95% 0.57 to 0.98; p=0.033).

This difference was basically driven by a lower AMI rate (3.5% vs. 10.4%; p<0.001) and a lower revascularization rate (5.9% vs. 11.4%; p=0.005) in the ZES group.

The definite/probable thrombosis rate was lower in the ZES group and bleeding events were similar in the two groups.

Conclusion
Zotarolimus eluting stents in high bleeding risk patients with stable or unstable coronary artery disease provide superior safety and efficacy than conventional bare metal stents.

Editorial Comment
Just one month DAPT was safe in this study but we should not generalize this benefit to all drug eluting stents until there is more information. The Leaders Free study on biolimus eluting stents published in NEJM this past October, also showed superior safety and efficacy in high bleeding risk patients with only one month DAPT.

More articles by this author

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

Patients at High Risk of Bleeding After Coronary Angioplasty: Are Risk Assessment Tools ARC-HBR and PRECISE-DAPT Useful?

Patients undergoing coronary stenting typically receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 6 to 12 months, consisting of a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor and aspirin. While DAPT...

ACC 2025 | WARRIOR: Ischemia in Women with Non-Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

Approximately half of all women with symptomatic ischemia who undergo coronary angiography are found to have non-obstructive coronary artery disease ((ischemia and non-obstructive coronary...

ACC 2025 | FLAVOUR II: Angiography-Derived FFR-Guided vs. IVUS-Guided PCI

Physiological assessment is effective when it comes to decision-making for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, despite the available evidence, its use remains limited. AngioFFR...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

RACE Trial: Effect of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty and Riociguat on Right Ventricular Afterload and Function in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension

Even though pulmonary endarterectomy is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), up to 40% of patients are not candidates because...

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

TAVR in Small Annuli: What Valve Should We Use?

One of the major challenges of severe aortic stenosis are patients with small aortic annuli, defined as ≤430 mm² aortic valve area. This condition...