title: Percutaneous coronary intervention with everolimus-eluting stents (Xience V): systematic review and direct-indirect comparison meta-analyses with paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus) and sirolimus-eluting stents (Cypher).
abstract: First-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have brought major improvements in results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there is currently debate on the safety of these first-generation DES, given the potential for late stent thrombosis, especially after discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy. Second-generation DES, such as zotarolimus- (Endeavor) and everolimus-eluting stents (Xience V), have recently become available in the USA and/or Europe. Indeed, the Xience V stent holds the promise of superior anti-restenotic efficacy as well as long-term safety, yet there is uncertainty on its risk-benefit balance. Authors conducted a systematic review of basic science and clinical evidence on the Xience V, by thoroughly searching PubMed and online databases (updated September 2007). They also compared the clinical results of Xience V vs paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus) and sirolimus-eluting stents (Cypher) by means of direct and indirect comparison meta-analysis. A total of three clinical studies has been retrieved focusing on Xience V, however both most recent and important trials were still unpublished. The first trial compared Xience V vs bare-metal stents, whereas the other two randomized trials compared Xience V vs Taxus. Direct meta-analysis of Xience V vs Taxus showed that Xience V was significantly superior to Taxus in preventing binary angiographic restenosis and target lesion revascularization (P<0.05 for both). Indirect comparison between Xience V and Cypher, exploiting a recent 16-trial large meta-analysis, showed that Xience V was at least as effective as Cypher in preventing target lesion revascularization (P=0.12). Everolimus-eluting stents (Xience V) appear as a major breakthrough in coronary interventions, and superior efficacy has already been demonstrated in comparison to paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus). Data available to date also suggest that Xience V is at least as effective as sirolimus-eluting stents (Cypher). Whether long-term results and direct comparison to Cypher will also be favorable remains to be established by future clinical trials.
authors.affiliation: Interventional Cardiology, Division of Cardiology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. gbiondizoccai@gmail.com
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Biondi-Zoccai
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Lotrionte
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Moretti
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Agostoni
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Sillano
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Laudito
authors.forename: I
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Sheiban
mesh_terms: D015906:Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary / Q000379:methods; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000628:therapy*; D054855:Drug-Eluting Stents; D000068338:Everolimus; D006801:Humans; D007166:Immunosuppressive Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D017239:Paclitaxel / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D020123:Sirolimus / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000031:analogs & derivatives*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D007166:Immunosuppressive Agents; D000068338:Everolimus; D017239:Paclitaxel; D020123:Sirolimus