Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 6, 2025

Implantation of Human-Sized Coronary Stents into Rat Abdominal Aorta Using a Trans-Femoral Access
Published on: November 19, 2020
Complementary evidence on the performance of coronary stents generated by a randomized controlled trial and a
Alexandre Gautier1, Marco Roffi2, Peep Laanmets3
1Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Hôpital Privé Jacques Cartier, Massy, France.
Insights
Large registries offer valuable real-world data for coronary stent evaluation, complementing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A registry study found similar safety outcomes but higher revascularization rates in the trial group, suggesting registries enhance post-market surveillance.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Clinical Trials & Epidemiology
- Medical Device Evaluation
Background:
- Postmarketing evaluation of coronary stents relies on large-scale registries and randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
- The scientific relevance of registry data compared to RCTs for coronary stent performance is debated.
- Real-world data from registries can complement RCT findings for comprehensive device assessment.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the performance evidence of the Ultimaster coronary stent from a regulatory RCT and a real-world registry.
- To assess the scientific relevance and complementary value of registry data in postmarketing surveillance.
- To evaluate coronary stent performance across diverse patient populations and clinical settings.
Main Methods:
- Comparison of patients from the CENTURY II (CII-UM) RCT (n=551) with the e-ULTIMASTER (e-UM) registry (n=35,389).
- Adjudication of all major events by an independent clinical event committee in both studies.
- Propensity weighted analysis to balance baseline and procedural differences between RCT and registry cohorts.
Main Results:
- The e-UM registry exhibited more complex coronary artery disease compared to the CII-UM RCT.
- One-year follow-up showed no significant differences in all-cause death, cardiac death, target lesion failure, or target vessel myocardial infarction (MI) between groups (excluding periprocedural MI).
- The RCT group (CII-UM) had a significantly higher target vessel revascularization rate compared to the registry group (e-UM).
Conclusions:
- Well-conducted large-scale registries provide valuable complementary evidence to RCTs for postmarket coronary stent evaluation.
- Registries offer insights into device performance across broader patient uses and geographic areas.
- Registry data enhances the understanding of real-world coronary stent outcomes beyond initial regulatory trials.
Background:
Large-scale registries can provide valuable complementary data to randomized controlled trials (RCT) for the postmarketing evaluation of coronary stents, but their scientific relevance remains debated.
Methods:
We sought to compare the evidence on the performance of a single coronary stent platform generated by the RCT for its regulatory approval and a well-conducted international registry. Patients treated with the Ultimaster coronary stent in the CENTURY II (CII-UM) trial (n = 551) were compared to patients in the real-world e-ULTIMASTER (e-UM) registry (n = 35,389). All major events were adjudicated by an independent clinical event committee in both studies. Propensity weighted analysis was used to balance baseline and procedural differences between the 2 populations.
Results:
Coronary artery disease was more complex in e-UM compared to CII-UM, including more acute coronary syndromes, multivessel disease, left main, arterial, or venous grafts, and chronic total occlusions (P < .005 for all). At one-year follow-up and after excluding periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) there was no statistically significant difference between CII-UM and e-UM regarding all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-1.20, P = .14), cardiac death (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.29-1.72, P = .45), target lesion failure (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78-1.78, P = .44), and target vessel MI (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.24-2.38, P = .63). However, target vessel revascularization rate was significantly higher in CII-UM than in e-UM, HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.23-2.56, P = .002.
Conclusions:
A well-conducted large-scale registry can provide valuable complementary evidence to RCTs on the postmarket performance of new coronary stents, across a wider range of uses and various geographic areas.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Clinical Trials: Overview
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care

