Korean Circ J.  2019 Jan;49(1):69-80. 10.4070/kcj.2018.0097.

Safety and Efficacy of Biodegradable Polymer-biolimus-eluting Stents (BP-BES) Compared with Durable Polymer-everolimus-eluting Stents (DP-EES) in Patients Undergoing Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

  • 1Division of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center, Mediplex Sejong General Hospital, Incheon, Korea.
  • 2Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. jyhahn@skku.edu
  • 3Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University School of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea.
  • 4Division of Cardiology, Dongsuwon General Hospital, Suwon, Korea.
  • 5Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
  • 6Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Changwon Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Changwon, Korea. mccoyojh@gmail.com


There are no data comparing clinical outcomes of complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between biodegradable polymer-biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and durable polymer-everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES). We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BP-BES compared with DP-EES in patients undergoing complex PCI.
Patients enrolled in the SMART-DESK registry were stratified into 2 categories based on the complexity of PCI. Complex PCI was defined as having at least one of the following features: unprotected left main lesion, ≥2 lesions treated, total stent length >40 mm, minimal stent diameter ≤2.5 mm, or bifurcation as target lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 2 years of follow-up.
Of 1,999 patients, 1,145 (57.3%) underwent complex PCI: 521 patients were treated with BP-BES and 624 with DP-EES. In propensity-score matching analysis (481 pairs), the risks of TLF (3.8% vs. 5.2%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.578; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.246-1.359; p=0.209), cardiac death (2.5% vs. 2.5%, adjusted HR, 0.787; 95% CI, 0.244-2.539; p=0.689), TV-MI (0.5% vs. 0.4%, adjusted HR, 1.128; 95% CI, 0.157-8.093; p=0.905), and TLR (1.1% vs. 2.9%, adjusted HR, 0.390; 95% CI, 0.139-1.095; p=0.074) did not differ between 2 stent groups after complex PCI.
Clinical outcomes of BP-BES were comparable to those of DP-EES at 2 years after complex PCI. Our data suggest that use of BP-BES is acceptable, even for complex PCI.


Coronary artery disease; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Drug-eluting stents

MeSH Terms

Coronary Artery Disease
Drug-Eluting Stents
Follow-Up Studies
Myocardial Infarction
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention*
Full Text Links
  • KCJ
export Copy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
    DB Error: unknown error