Circulation Journal
Online ISSN : 1347-4820
Print ISSN : 1346-9843
ISSN-L : 1346-9843
Cardiovascular Intervention
Sirolimus-Eluting Stent vs. Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Coronary Intervention in Patients on Chronic Hemodialysis
Takashi SakakibaraHideki IshiiTakanobu ToriyamaToru AoyamaHiroshi TakahashiDaisuke KamoiYoshihiro KawamuraKazuhiro KawashimaKohei YonedaTetsuya AmanoMiho TanakaDaiji YoshikawaMutsuharu HayashiTatsuaki MatsubaraToyoaki Murohara
Author information

2012 Volume 76 Issue 2 Pages 351-355


Background: Even in the drug-eluting stent era, adverse cardiac events, including restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), have been more frequently seen in patients on hemodialysis (HD) than in non-HD patients. The objective of this study was to compare the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and everolimus-eluting stent (EES) for prevention of adverse cardiac events, including restenosis, in HD patients. Methods and Results: A total of 100 consecutive patients on HD who underwent PCI were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive SES or EES. Although there was no difference between the 2 groups in baseline patient and lesion characteristics, the angiographic restenosis rate at 8-month follow-up was 21.2% in the SES group and 8.7% in the EES group (P=0.041). Significant differences were also seen in % diameter stenosis (%DS), minimal lumen diameter, and late lumen loss at 8-month follow-up (P=0.0024, P=0.0040, and P=0.033, respectively). During the 1-year follow-up, major adverse cardiac events occurred in 11 (22.0%) patients in the SES group and in 5 (10.0%) patients in the EES group (P=0.10). Conclusions: The use of EES was as safe as that of SES. Moreover, EES significantly prevented restenosis in patients on maintenance HD compared with SES. (Circ J 2012; 76: 351-355)

Content from these authors
Previous article Next article