Aims: Our aim was to investigate whether long-term (three-year) clinical outcomes after multivessel treatment with the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) were similar to single-vessel treatment. Methods and results: The RESOLUTE Global Clinical Trial Program enrolled 7,618 patients, of whom 1,562 underwent multivessel and 6,053 single-vessel treatment with the R-ZES. Patients in the multivessel group were more likely to have complex lesions (58% vs. 44%, p<0.001). Clinical outcomes were compared using a Cox regression model adjusted by propensity score to account for differences in baseline characteristics. Compared with single-vessel treatment, multivessel treatment was associated with more complex anatomy and longer mean total stent length (57.8±28.6 vs. 26.7±15.2 mm, p<0.001). At three years, the cumulative incidence of target lesion failure was similar in patients with multivessel and singlevessel treatment (11.0% vs. 9.1%, adjusted p=0.986), as was the incidence of cardiac death or target vessel myocardial infarction (6.7% vs. 5.7%, adjusted p=0.793), the incidence of clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (5.1% vs. 4.4%, adjusted p=0.904), and the incidence of Academic Research Consortium definite or probable stent thrombosis (1.2% vs. 0.9%, adjusted p=0.544). Conclusions: Multivessel treatment with R-ZES provided good long-term clinical outcomes that were comparable to those achieved with single-vessel stenting, supporting the efficacy and safety of R-ZES in patients in this setting.

Additional Metadata
Keywords Coronary artery disease, Drug-eluting stent, Multivessel disease, Multivessel stenting, Percutaneous coronary intervention, Zotarolimus-eluting stent
Persistent URL,
Journal EuroIntervention
Manoharan, G, Belardi, J.A, Du, Z. (Zhimin), Lee, M. (Michael), Qiao, S. (Shubin), Serruys, P.W.J.C, … Yeung, A. (Alan). (2017). Comparison of clinical outcomes after multivessel versus single-vessel stenting with the zotarolimus-eluting stent in the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Trial Program. EuroIntervention, 12(13), 1605–1613. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-16-00079