Table 1 Comparative trials: sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents Author Trial Indication Patients (N) Kastrati et al 2005a ISAR-DESIRE In-stent 300s (RCT) restenosis Dibra et al 2005 Mehilli et al 2006 Windecker et al 2005 Morice et al 2006 Pan et al 2007 Lee et al 2006 Park et al 2006 Goy et al 2005 Kaiser et al 2005 SIRTAX (RCT) All comer ISAR-DIABTES (RCT) ISAR-SMART 3 (RCT) REALITY (RCT) CORPAL PROSIT (RCT) Long Lesions II TAXI (RCT) BASKET (RCT) Diabetes Small coronary arteries De novo lesions Bifurcation lesions AMI Lesion length >25 mm All comer All comer 250 360 1.012 1386 205 231 500 202 826 Sirolimus-eluting coronary stents Outcomes Angiographic restenosis SES: 14.3% PES: 21.7% PTCA: 44.6% Target vessel revascularization SES: 8.0% PES: 19.0% PTCA: 33.0% In-segment restenosis SES: 6.9% PES: 16.5% Target lesion revascularisation SES: 6.4% PES: 12.0% Angiographic restenosis SES: 11.4% PES: 19.0% Target lesion revascularization SES: 6.6% PES: 14.7% MACE SES: 6.2% PES: 9.8% Target lesion revascularisation SES: 4.8% PES: 8.3% In-lesion restenosis SES: 9.6% PES: 11.1% Target lesion revascularization SES: 4% PES: 13% MACE rates @ 9 months SES: 6.9% PES: 14.8% In-segment restenosis SES: 3.0% PES: 10.3% MACE rates @ 9 months SES: 3.0% PES: 7.8% MACE rates @ 7 months SES: 6% PES: 4% Target lesion revascularization SES: 3% PES: 1% Target vessel revascularisation SES: 1.5% PES: 2.6% Target lesion revascularization SES: 0.8% PES: 0.7% Abbreviations: RCT, randomized controlled trial; PES, paclitaxel-eluting stents; SES, sirolimus-eluting stents. Results from PROSIT, the prosective, randomized, independent, controlled trial, in acute MI patients, show that rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 9-month follow-up were 6.9% (sirolimus) and 14.8% (paclitaxel). The MACE rates in the paclitaxel cohort were driven by death (7.8%) and TLR (7.8%). 231 patients were enrolled into the study, randomized to either SES (n = 116) or PES stents (n = 115) (Lee et al 2006). Similarly, data from a meta-analysis, in which the results from six randomized controlled trials were combined so as to compare the Cypher and Taxus drug-eluting stents. The six trials included in the meta-analysis were CORPAL, ISAR-DIABETES, ISAR-DESIRE, REALITY, SIRTAX, and TAXI. A total of 3669 patients with 4878 lesions were treated with either CYPHER or TAXUS stents in the seven trials. The analysis revealed that patients receiving SES had a signiﬁcantly lower risk of restenosis and target vessel revascularization compared with those receiving PES. Rates of death, death or MI, and stent thrombosis were similar (Kastrati et al 2006b). Further data on the use of CYPHER stents to treat complex lesions come from a Danish study. The ScandStent (The Stenting of Coronary Arteries in Non-Stress/Benestent Disease Trial) study is a multicentre trial randomized 322 patients with complex coronary lesions to either the CYPHER stent or bare metal control stent. It provides independent conﬁrmation that the superiority of CYPHER over bare metal stents seen in the pivotal trials in less complex lesions also holds for more complex lesions (Kelbaek et al 2006). Follow-up results from ARTS II (Arterial Revasculariza- tion Therapies Study part II of the CYPHER SES in the treat- ment of patients with multi-vessel de novo coronary artery Vascular Health and Risk Management 2007:3(2) 195