RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Evaluate safety and efficacy of polymer-free biolimus-eluting stents (PF-BESs) versus ultrathin stents in unprotected left main (ULM) or bifurcation. BACKGROUND: PF-BESs due to reduced length of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are increasingly used. However, there are limited data about safety and efficacy for ULM or bifurcation. METHODS: We selected all-patients treated for ULM or bifurcation from two multicenter real life registries (RAIN [NCT03544294] evaluating ultrathin stents, CHANCE [NCT03622203] appraising PF-BES). After propensity score with matching, the primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE; a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization [TLR], and stent thrombosis [ST]), while its components along with target vessel revascularization (TVR) secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Three thousand and three patients treated with ultrathin stents and 446 with PF-BESs, resulting respectively in 562 and 281 after propensity score with matching (33 and 22%, respectively, with ULM disease). After 12 (8-20) months, rates of MACE were similar (9 vs. 8%, p = 0.56) without difference in TLR and ST (3.0 vs. 1.7%, p = .19 and 1.8 vs. 1.1%, p = .42). These results were consistent for ULM group (3 vs. 1.7% and 1.8 vs. 1.1%, p = .49 and .76), for non-ULM group (2.1 vs. 3.4%, p = .56 and 1.2 vs. 1.7%, p = .78) and for two-stent strategy (8.7 vs. 4.5% and 4.3 vs. 3.2%, p = .75 and .91). Among patients treated with 1 month of DAPT in both groups, those with ultrathin stents experienced higher rates of MACE related to all-cause death (22 vs. 12%, p = .04) with higher although not significant rates of ST (3 vs. 0%, p = .45). CONCLUSIONS: PF-BES implanted on ULM or BiF offered freedom from TLR and ST comparable to ultrathin stents. PF-BESs patients assuming DAPT for 1 month experienced a lower despite not significant incidence of ST.