Sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions: the REALITY trial: a randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT: Compared with bare metal stents, sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents have been shown to markedly improve angiographic and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary revascularization, but their performance in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions has not been compared in a prospective multicenter study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting vs paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized comparative trial (the REALITY trial) conducted between August 2003 and February 2004, with angiographic follow-up at 8 months and clinical follow-up at 12 months. SETTING: Ninety hospitals in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. PATIENTS: A total of 1386 patients (mean age, 62.6 years; 73.1% men; 28.0% with diabetes) with angina pectoris and 1 or 2 de novo lesions (2.25-3.00 mm in diameter) in native coronary arteries. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 701) or a paclitaxel-eluting stent (n = 685). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was in-lesion binary restenosis (presence of a more than 50% luminal-diameter stenosis) at 8 months. Secondary end points included 1-year rates of target lesion and vessel revascularization and a composite end point of cardiac death, Q-wave or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, or repeat target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: In-lesion binary restenosis at 8 months occurred in 86 patients (9.6%) with a sirolimus-eluting stent vs 95 (11.1%) with a paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.17; P = .31). For sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents, respectively, the mean (SD) in-stent late loss was 0.09 (0.43) mm vs 0.31 (0.44) mm (difference, -0.22 mm; 95% CI, -0.26 to -0.18 mm; P<.001), mean (SD) in-stent diameter stenosis was 23.1% (16.6%) vs 26.7% (15.8%) (difference, -3.60%; 95% CI, -5.12% to -2.08%; P<.001), and the number of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year was 73 (10.7%) vs 76 (11.4%) (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.27; P = .73). CONCLUSION: In this trial comparing sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents, there were no differences in the rates of binary restenosis or major adverse cardiac events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00235092.

A rapid and efficient ion-exchange chromatography for Lu–Hf, Sm–Nd, and Rb–Sr geochronology and the routine isotope analysis of sub-ng amounts of Hf by MC-ICP-MS

The development and improvement of MC-ICP-MS instruments have fueled the growth of Lu–Hf geochronology over the last two decades, but some limitations remain. Here, we present improvements in chemical separation and mass spectrometry that allow accurate and precise measurements of 176Hf/177Hf and 176Lu/177Hf in high-Lu/Hf samples (e.g., garnet and apatite), as well as for samples containing sub-nanogram quantities of Hf. When such samples are spiked, correcting for the isobaric interference of 176Lu on 176Hf is not always possible if the separation of Lu and Hf is insufficient. To improve the purification of Hf, the high field strength elements (HFSE, including Hf) are first separated from the rare earth elements (REE, including Lu) on a first-stage cation column modified after Patchett and Tatsumoto (Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 1980, 75, 263–267). Hafnium is further purified on an Ln-Spec column adapted from the procedures of Münker et al. (Geochem., Geophys., Geosyst., 2001, DOI: 10.1029/2001gc000183) and Wimpenny et al. (Anal. Chem., 2013, 85, 11258–11264) typically resulting in Lu/Hf < 0.0001, Zr/Hf < 1, and Ti/Hf < 0.1. In addition, Sm–Nd and Rb–Sr separations can easily be added to the described two-stage ion-exchange procedure for Lu–Hf. The isotopic compositions are measured on a Thermo Scientific Neptune Plus MC-ICP-MS equipped with three 1012 Ω resistors. Multiple 176Hf/177Hf measurements of international reference rocks yield a precision of 5–20 ppm for solutions containing 40 ppb of Hf, and 50–180 ppm for 1 ppb solutions (=0.5 ng sample Hf 0.5 in ml). The routine analysis of sub-ng amounts of Hf will facilitate Lu–Hf dating of low-concentration samples.