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

ACC 2026 | DKCRUSH VIII: IVUS or angiography to guide PCI in complex coronary bifurcations

Intracoronary imaging guidance has become an established recommended strategy in complex coronary lesions. In the specific setting of complex bifurcations, uncertainty remained regarding the...

ACC 2026 | OPTIMAL: IVUS Guidance in PCI of the Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered an equivalent alternative to coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis and...

ACC 2026 | IVUS-CHIP Trial: Intravascular ultrasound–guided versus angiography-guided complex PCI

Optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in complex lesions remains a relevant clinical challenge. In this context, the IVUS-CHIP trial was designed to evaluate...

ACC 2026 | ALL-RISE Trial: Coronary Physiological Assessment Using FFRangio

Coronary physiological assessment using pressure-wire techniques (FFR/iFR) carries a Class IA recommendation in ACC/AHA guidelines; however, its use remains limited due to factors such...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Therapeutic strategies in carotid free-floating thrombus: evidence and controversies

Carotid free-floating thrombus (cFFT) is a rare entity with a high embolic risk, associated with acute neurological events such as stroke or transient ischemic...

The Two Sides of the Coin: What Do CHAMPION-AF and CLOSURE-AF Teach Us About Left Atrial Appendage Closure?

Letter to the editor: Juan Manuel Pérez Asorey Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAO) is currently going through one of the most interesting stages of...

CLOSURE-AF: Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure versus Medical Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure has been proposed as an alternative to anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and high bleeding risk; however, comparative...