Xience™ Family of Drug-Eluting Stents

The World's Leading Drug-Eluting Stents (DES), with Unparalleled Clinical Outcomes1

Xience Family

XIENCE™ Stent as the Gold Standard Among DES1

A wealth of clinical evidence supports the safety of XIENCE™ Stent. It’s a decisive reason why interventional cardiologists (ICs) continue to be confident that the acute outcomes they observe in their patients will persist over the long term. XIENCE Skypoint™ Stent—with design improvements and a 48-mm stent option to treat long lesions—represents the latest generation among the XIENCE™ Stents.

trusted patient outcomes


XIENCE™ Stent Safety Outcomes

XIENCE Skypoint™ Stent carries on the tradition of excellent XIENCE™ safety outcomes. The stent demonstrates consistency with optimal acute and early outcomes—in all types of patients and in complex lesions.2,3

Types of Patients2,3Types of Lesions2,3
Short DAPTBifurcations
Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI)Calcified Lesions
DiabeticLong Lesions
In all types of patients and lesion types, XIENCE Stent data reveals 0.3% acute definite ST.
In all types of patients and lesion types, XIENCE Stent achieved 99% device success.

The 99% device success rate was the lowest success rate noted, even among a range of patient types in multiple clinical trials.2

Excellent Outcomes for Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI)4

Early outcomes in AMI patients revealed that XIENCE™ Stent showed significant improvement 2 weeks after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). For example, during that timeframe the findings demonstrated:

  • Better strut coverage (p < 0.01)
  • Less thrombus formation (p = 0.03)
  • Larger lumen area (p = 0.048)
In AMI patients, XIENCE Stent has a larger lumen area, less thrombus, and better strut coverage 2 weeks post PCI vs post PCI.
Representative OCT Images

XIENCE™ Stent also demonstrates safety among ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, a subgroup of AMI patients. At 30 days, the rate of definite stent thrombosis (ST) with XIENCE™ Stent vs bare metal stents (BMS) was significantly lower: 0.4% vs 1.6%, p = 0.02.5

In STEMI patients, XIENCE Stent has a definite ST rate 4x lower than that of BMS: 0.4% vs 1.6%, respectively.
Definite ST in STEMI Patients

Excellent Outcomes in Complex Patients

In other types of complex patients, early (30-day) outcomes reveal very low rates of definite ST. This includes patients with bifurcations, calcified lesions, and long lesions.

In other complex patients, XIENCE Stent has very low rates of 30-day definite ST: 0.0% for both bifurcations and calcified lesions, and 0.2% for long lesions.

Significantly Lower Acute, Early Stent Thrombosis

XIENCE™ Stent has significantly lower rates of acute and early ST than Synergy and Resolute DES.9,10

XIENCE™ Stent ST Rate 75% Lower vs Other DES

There is a 75% lower rate of acute (24-hour) definite ST with XIENCE™ Stent vs Synergy.9

The rate of acute definite ST is 0.3% with XIENCE Stent and 1.2% with Synergy.

XIENCE™ Stent ST Rate 88% Lower vs Other DES

There is an 88% lower rate of early (30-day) definite ST with XIENCE™ Stent vs Resolute.10

The rate of early (30-day) definite ST is 0.1% with XIENCE Stent and 0.8% with Resolute.

XIENCE™ Stent Is More Anti-Thrombotic Than Other DES11

Platelet adhesion is a key factor in stent thrombosis, and the XIENCE™ Stent’s unique, durable fluoropolymer was created to ensure long-term protection from thrombosis.

Preclinical testing confirms that the XIENCE™ Stent exhibits the least platelet adhesion compared to other DES (p < 0.01). This factor protects patients from short-term complications.11

XIENCE Stent has much lower platelet adhesion compared to Synergy, Orsiro, Ultimaster, Onyx, and BioFreedom drug-eluting stents

High Bleeding Risk Patients: Low Event Rates at 1 Year12

One-year subgroup analysis data from the STOPDAPT-2 trial showed excellent patient outcomes for high bleeding risk (HBR) patients using 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Patients at high bleeding risk who followed a 1-month DAPT regimen had significantly lower event rates than those using a 12-month DAPT strategy.

XIENCE Stent has much lower platelet adhesion compared to Synergy, Orsiro, Ultimaster, Onyx, and BioFreedom drug-eluting stents

Evidence of Unparalleled Outcomes Long After PCI1

Data from multiple studies show that XIENCE™ Stents deliver unparalleled patient outcomes which last far beyond the intervention. Extensive evidence of low definite ST rates is outlined below.

XIENCE Stent reveals 0% definite ST in diverse populations: real-world and short DAPT patients 1-year data, complex lesions 3-year data, simple lesions 5-year data.
Manuals & Technical Resources

Manuals & Technical Resources

Order Cardiovascular Products

Cardiovascular Products

Customer Service

Customer Service

References

  1. Zanchin C, et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(17):1665-1675. Serruys P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:136-146. Shiomi H, et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:637-647. Kufner S, et al. Circulation. 2019:139(3):325-333. Palmerini T, et al. Lancet. 2013;379:1393-1402. Bangalore S, et al. Circulation. 2012;125:2873-2891. Bangalore S, et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(6):378-390. Pilgrim T, et al. Lancet. 2014;384:2111-2122. Pilgrim T, et al. Lancet. 2018;392:737-746. Data on file at Abbott.
  2. Saito S, et al. EuroIntervention. 2019;15(11):e1006-e1013. Saito S, et al. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2021-2031. Natsuaki M, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:181-190. Stone G, et al. Lancet. 2018;392:1530-1540. *Note: 99% was the lowest device success rate.
  3. Zanchin C, et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(17):1665-1675. Serruys P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:136-146. Watanabe H, et al. JAMA. 2019;321(24):2414-2427.
  4. Morino Y, et al. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2019;34(1):14-24.
  5. Sabate M, et al. Lancet. 2012;380:1482-1490.
  6. Džavík V, et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;82(3):E163-E172.
  7. Onuma Y, et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;76:634-642.
  8. Hong S, et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:1438-1446.
  9. Zanchin C, et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(17):1665-1675.
  10. Serruys P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:136-146.
  11. Jinnouchi H, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:(Suppl B):TCT-291. Zanchin, C. et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(17):1665-1675.
  12. Watanabe H, et al. Cardiovasc Interv and Ther. 2021;36:91-103.
  13. Von Birgelen C, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(15):1350-1361.
  14. Van Geuns RJ, et al. TCT 2019, IDEAL-LM.
  15. Chevalier B, et al. EuroIntervention. 2018;13(13):1561-1564.
  16. Gao R, et al. TCT 2019, ABSORB China.

MAT-2107574 v1.0