# Everolimus-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent bij STEMI: 5-jaarsresultaten EXAMINATION-trial

*geplaatst 2016-01-23 · Algemeen · Lancet (London, England) · doi 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00548-6 · https://hartvaat.nl/2016/01/23/everolimus-eluting-stent-versus-bare-metal-stent-bij-stemi-5-jaarsresultaten-exa/*

Langetermijnresultaten van de EXAMINATION-trial die everolimus-eluting stents vergeleek met bare-metal stents bij STEMI. Een van de eerste studies met 5-jaarsdata over nieuwe-generatie drug-eluting stents bij acuut myocardinfarct.

## English: Clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with everolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents (EXAMINATION): 5-year results of a randomised trial.

Long-term results from the EXAMINATION trial showed that everolimus-eluting stents provide durable clinical benefit compared with bare-metal stents in patients with STEMI, supporting universal drug-eluting stent use in primary PCI.

## Abstract (original, from the publication)

BACKGROUND: Data for the safety and efficacy of new-generation drug-eluting stents at long-term follow-up, and specifically in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, are scarce. In the EXAMINATION trial, we compared everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with bare-metal stents (BMS) in an all-comer population with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. In this study, we assessed the 5-year outcomes of the population in the EXAMINATION trial. METHODS: In the multicentre EXAMINATION trial, done in Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands, patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive EES or BMS. The random allocation schedule was computer-generated and central randomisation (by telephone) was used to allocate patients in blocks of four or six, stratified by centre. Patients were masked to treatment assignment. At 5 years, we assessed the combined patient-oriented outcome of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00828087. FINDINGS: 1498 patients were randomly assigned to receive either EES (n=751) or BMS (n=747). At 5 years, complete clinical follow-up data were obtained for 731 patients treated with EES and 727 treated with BMS (97% of both groups). The patient-oriented endpoint occurred in 159 (21%) patients in the EES group versus 192 (26%) in the BMS group (hazard ratio 0·80, 95% CI 0·65-0·98; p=0·033). This difference was mainly driven by a reduced rate of all-cause mortality (65 [9%] vs 88 [12%]; 0·72, 0·52-0·10; p=0·047). INTERPRETATION: Our findings should be taken as a point of reference for the assessment of new bioresorbable polymer-based metallic stents or bioresorbable scaffolds in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. FUNDING: Spanish Heart Foundation.

Auteurs: Manel Sabaté, Salvatore Brugaletta, Angel Cequier, Andrés Iñiguez, Antonio Serra, Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo, Vicente Mainar, Gianluca Campo, Maurizio Tespili, Peter den Heijer, Armando Bethencourt, Nicolás Vazquez, Gerrit Anne van Es, Bianca Backx, Marco Valgimigli, Patrick W Serruys

---
Bron: Lancet (London, England), https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00548-6. Bijgewerkt 2026-07-03T13:25:16Z. Citeer vrij, met bronvermelding en een link naar hartvaat.nl (de url van het record). Samenvattingen zijn redactioneel werk van HartVaat; de oorspronkelijke publicaties blijven van hun uitgevers (doi). Geen medisch advies.