Purpose: To investigate further the safety and efficacy of the sirolimus-eluting S. M.A.R.T. Nitinol Self-expanding Stent by comparison with a bare stent in superficial femoral artery (SFA) obstructions.
Materials and methods: This randomized, double-blind study involved 57 patients (29 in the sirolimus-eluting stent group and 28 in the bare stent group) with chronic limb ischemia and SFA occlusions (66.7%) or stenoses (average lesion length, 81.5 mm +/- 41.2). Stent implantation followed standard interventional techniques and a maximum of two stents could be implanted. The primary endpoint was the in-stent mean lumen diameter at 6 months as determined by quantitative angiography.
Results: Both stent types were effective in revascularizing the diseased SFA and allowing sustained patency for at least 6 months. There was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups in the in-stent mean lumen diameter at 6 months (4.94 mm +/- 0.69 and 4.76 mm +/- 0.54 mm for sirolimus-eluting and bare stent groups, respectively; P = .31). Although the diameter of the target lesion tended to be larger and percent stenosis tended to be lower with the sirolimus-eluting stent, there were no statistically significant differences between treatments in terms of any of the variables. The mean late loss values were 0.38 mm +/- 0.64 and 0.68 mm +/- 0.97 for the sirolimus-eluting stent group and the bare stent group, respectively (P = .20). The binary restenosis rates, with a cutoff of 50% at 6 months, were zero in the sirolimus-eluting stent group and 7.7% in the bare stent group (P = .49). Clinical outcomes matched angiographic outcomes with improvements in ankle-brachial index and symptoms of claudication. There was no significant difference between treatments in terms of adverse events.
Conclusion: Although there is a trend for greater efficacy in the sirolimus-eluting stent group, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the variables.