Aims: The aim of this study is to compare the SUPRAFLEX sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with respect to target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months in a noninferiority trial in a “real-world” patient population. Methods and results: This is a prospective, randomised, 1:1 balanced, controlled, single-blind, multicentre study comparing clinical outcomes at 12 months between SUPRAFLEX and XIENCE in an “allcomers” patient population, comprising a total of 1,430 enrolled subjects with symptomatic coronary artery disease who qualify for percutaneous coronary interventions at 23 centres in Europe. The primary endpoint is a non-inferiority comparison of the device-oriented composite endpoint target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation) of the SUPRAFLEX group to the XIENCE group at 12 months post procedure. Secondary endpoints include the patient-oriented composite endpoint, target vessel failure, mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularisation and stent thrombosis rates (ARC classification). Conclusions: The TALENT trial aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of the thin-strut SUPRAFLEX compared to the current standard of care (XIENCE EES) in patients with atherosclerotic lesions. This will provide valuable information on the impact of this thin-strut device in an all-comers population.

Additional Metadata
Keywords •ACS/NSTE-ACS • drug-eluting stent • stable angina
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.4244/eij-d-18-00499, hdl.handle.net/1765/118812
Journal EuroIntervention
Citation
Modolo, R, Chichareon, P, Kogame, N, Asano, T, Chang, C.C., de Winter, R.J, … Serruys, P.W.J.C. (2019). A prospective multicentre randomised all-comers trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of the thin-strut sirolimus-eluting coronary stent SUPRAFLEX: rationale and design of the Thin Strut Sirolimus-eluting Stent in All Comers Population vs Everolimus-eluting Stent (TALENT) trial. EuroIntervention, 15(4), E362–E369. doi:10.4244/eij-d-18-00499