Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32958459›Full record

Trial reportEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2021

BioMatrix versus Orsiro biodegradable polymer stents in all-comer patients with coronary artery disease: the multicentre, randomised BIODEGRADE trial.

Chang-Hwan Yoon, Young Jin Choi, Jin Joo Park, Si-Hyuck Kang, Sun-Hwa Kim, Jung-Won Suh, Young-Seok Cho, Tae-Jin Youn, Myeong-Kon Kim, Kwang Soo Cha and 8 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. To be better among the best: a difficult task.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Chang-Hwan YoonSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Rebublic of Korea.
Young Jin Choi
Jin Joo Park
Si-Hyuck Kang
Sun-Hwa Kim
Jung-Won Suh
Young-Seok Cho
Tae-Jin Youn
Myeong-Kon Kim
Kwang Soo Cha
Seung-Hwan Lee
Bum-Kee Hong
Seung-Woon Rha
Woong-Chol Kang
Jae-Hwan Lee
Sang-Hyun Kim
In-Ho Chae
Collaborators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe aim of this trial was to compare the safety and efficacy of a thin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting cobalt-chromium stent (Orsiro) to a thick-strut biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BioMatrix). METHODS AND

resultsThis randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial was conducted among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF). Between July 2014 and September 2017, we randomly assigned 2,341 patients to BioMatrix stents (n=1,166) or Orsiro stents (n=1,175). We analysed 2,327 patients who completed 18-month follow-up. The mean patient age was 63.5 years, and 1,565 (67.3%) patients presented with acute coronary syndrome. At 18 months, 34 (2.9%) patients with BioMatrix stents and 24 (2.1%) with Orsiro stents experienced TLF (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, upper limit of one-sided 95% confidence interval: 1.18, p for non-inferiority <0.0001). No significant differences were noted in rates of cardiac death (16 [1.4%] vs 12 [1.0%], p=0.558), target lesion-related myocardial infarction (0 [0%] vs 3 [0.3%], p=0.250), target lesion revascularisation (18 [1.6%] vs 10 [0.9%], p=0.124), or stent thrombosis (0 [0%] vs 2 [0.2%], p=0.50).

conclusionsIn patients with a high prevalence of acute coronary syndrome, Orsiro stents were not inferior to BioMatrix stents. Both showed good clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseDrug-Eluting StentsPercutaneous Coronary InterventionAbsorbable ImplantsHumansMiddle AgedPolymersProsthesis DesignTreatment OutcomePolymers

Identifiers

PMID32958459
PMCPMC9725076

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.