Ten-year clinical outcomes of first-generation drug-eluting stents: the Sirolimus-Eluting vs. Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization (SIRTAX) VERY LATE trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Compared with bare metal stents, first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are associated with an increased risk of late restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST). Whether this risk continues or attenuates during long-term follow-up remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We extended the follow-up of 1012 patients [sirolimus-eluting stent (SES): N = 503 and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES): N = 509] included in the all-comers, randomized Sirolimus-Eluting vs. Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization (SIRTAX) trial to 10 years. Follow-up was complete in 895 patients (88.4%) at 10 years. At 1, 5, and 10 years of follow-up, rates of ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR) were 8.1%, 14.6% and 17.7%, respectively, and rates of ST were 1.9%, 4.5% and 5.6%, respectively. The annual risks of ID-TLR and definite ST were significantly higher between 1 and 5 years as compared with the 5- to 10-year period [ID-TLR: 1.8% vs. 0.7%/year, hazard ratio (HR) 0.36, 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) 0.21-0.62, P < 0.001; definite ST: 0.67% vs. 0.23%/year, HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.75, P = 0.01]. The attenuation of the risk of ID-TLR and ST beyond 5 years was independent of age. Major adverse events (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ID-TLR) occurred in 33.7% of SES- and 33.8% of PES-treated patients (P = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: During long-term follow-up through 10 years, the annual risks of ID-TLR and definite ST significantly decreased beyond 5 years after first-generation DES implantation. These findings may have important implications for secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention with first-generation DES including long-term antiplatelet therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00297661.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".