TABLE 4.

RO‐ZES versus O‐SES in patients with acute MI at 2‐year follow‐up

	RO‐ZES n = 626	O‐SES n = 649	Hazard ratio (95%‐CI)	Plog‐rank	Adjusted HRa (95%‐CI)	p value
Target vessel failure	38 (6.2)	39 (6.1)	1.01 (0.65–1.58)	.97	0.96 (0.62–1.51)	.87
Cardiac death	5 (0.8)	12 (1.7)	0.43 (0.15–1.22)	.10	0.40 (0.14–1.14)	.09
Target vessel MI	12 (2.0)	16 (2.5)	0.78 (0.37–1.64)	.50	0.76 (0.36–1.60)	.46
Clinically indicated TVR	29 (4.7)	22 (3.5)	1.36 (0.78–2.37)	.27	1.31 (0.75–2.28)	.35
Target lesion failure	32 (5.2)	31 (4.8)	1.07 (0.65–1.76)	.79	1.04 (0.75–1.43)	.83
Clinically indicated TLR	23 (3.7)	14 (2.2)	1.71 (0.88–3.32)	.11	1.64 (0.84–3.18)	.15
Definite‐or‐probable stent thrombosis	1 (0.2)	8 (1.2)	0.13 (0.02–1.03)	.053b	0.14 (0.02–1.09)	.06
Definite stent thrombosis	1 (0.2)	6 (0.9)	0.17 (0.02–1.43)	.06	0.18 (0.02–1.51)	.11

Note: Values are n(%).

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; MI, myocardial infarction; O‐SES, Orsiro sirolimus‐eluting stent; RO‐ZES, Resolute Onyx zotarolimus‐eluting stent; TLR, target lesion revascularization; TVR, target vessel revascularization.

^a Adjusted for sex, diabetes mellitus and multivessel treatment.

^b Wald‐test used because p_log‐rank(based on chi‐square) did not correspond with 95%‐CI due to very low event rate in RO‐ZES(p_log‐rank = 0.02).