Polymer-Free vs. Biodegradable Polymer Stents: SORT OUT IX 5-Year Outcomes

In a constant strive to achieve life time management, interventional cardiologists focus on optimizing coronary scaffolds, which calls for the development of devices with better long-term performance and safety profiles, eliminating durable polymers and optimizing antiproliferation drug release. 

To this end, Jensen et al. have published the SORT OUT IX 5-year followup outcomes. This multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority study compared the long term performance of the biolimus A9-coated polymer-free stent BioFreedom vs. the ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent  Orsiro. 

The study included 3,151 patients, with very low loss rate at followup (0.3%), assessed at years 1 and 5 (according to registry). The primary end point was target vessel failure (TLF), a combination of cardiac death, target vessel MI (TV-MI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR).

During the first 12 months, TLF rate was 5.0% for BioFreedom vs. 3.7% for Orsiro (RR 1.34; CI95%: 0.96–1.89; p=0.089). While this difference did not reach statistical significance, the TLR component was: 3.5% for BioFreedom vs. 1.3% for Orsiro (RR 2.76; CI95%: 1.65–4.62; p<0.001). This finding suggests lower initial clinical efficacy for BioFreedom in maintaining the treated coronary lumen. 

Read also: Three-Year Outcomes of Mitral Valve-in-Valve Therapy with Balloon-Expandable Valves in the United States.

Safety events such as all-cause mortality (2.0% vs 2.7%), cardiac death (1.0% vs 1.8%), and definite stent thrombosis (0.7% in both groups) were low and similar, with no significant differences.

At extended followup (1 to 5 years),  TLF incidence was 9.6% for BioFreedom and 8.8% for Orsiro (RR 1.11; 95% CI: 0.88–1.41; p=0.388), with comparable TLR rates (4.4% vs 3.9%; RR 1.13; 95% CI: 0.80–1.62; p=0.484). Other events such as lesion related infarction (3.8% vs 3.5%), cardiac death (4.2% vs 3.6%) and definite thrombosis (0.8% vs 1.1%) also showed no statistically significant differences, which suggests similar clinical results after the second year. 

Read also: Edge-to-Edge Treatment in Cardiogenic Shock.

By the end of year 5, accumulated TLF rate resulted 14.1% for BioFreedom and 12.0% for Orsiro (RR 1.19; 95% CI: 0.97–1.44; p=0.088), again with no statistical significance.

Conclusions

The SORT OUT IX 5-year outcomes have shown long term comparable safety in terms of death, MI or stent thrombosis. However, the polymer free strategy showed better TLR rate during the first year, which could be attributed to its rapid drug release (28 days) and thicker struts (120 µm) vs Orsiro (60–80 µm and 3-month release). 

Original Title: Five-year outcomes of a drug-coated polymer-free biolimus-eluting stent versus an ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer sirolimuseluting stent.

Reference: Jensen LO, Jakobsen L, Eftekhari A, Ellert-Gregersen J, Støttrup NB, Engstrøm T, Kahlert J, Freeman P, Veien KT, Jensen RV, Lassen JF, Junker A, Christiansen EH. Five-year outcomes of a drug-coated polymer-free biolimus-eluting stent versus an ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent. EuroIntervention. 2025 Jun 2;21(11):e617-e628. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-24-00586. PMID: 40464671; PMCID: PMC12105667.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

Dr. Omar Tupayachi
Dr. Omar Tupayachi
Member of the Editorial Board of solaci.org

More articles by this author

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Intravascular Imaging-Guided PCI vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Multiple randomized clinical trials have demonstrated superior outcomes with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main...

AHA 2025 | OCEAN Study: Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelet Therapy After Successful Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

After a successful atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, the need to maintain long-term anticoagulation (AC) remains uncertain, especially considering the very low residual embolic risk...

AHA 2025 | VESALIUS-CV: Evolocumab in High-Cardiovascular-Risk Patients Without Prior MI or Stroke

LDL cholesterol is a well-established factor for cardiovascular disease. Therapy with PCSK9 inhibitors, including evolocumab, has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....