BACKGROUND: Second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are expected to show better arterial repair than older DES. We angioscopically compared the biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus A9-eluting stent (BES) and durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) to explore differences in arterial repair. METHODS AND RESULTS: Angioscopy was performed 9 ± 1 months after 15 BES and 16 SES were implanted initially in the native coronary artery. Heterogeneity of neointimal coverage (NIC) as well as the dominant NIC grade was examined. NIC was defined as: grade 0 = fully visible struts; grade 1 = struts bulging into the lumen, but covered; grade 2 = embedded, but translucent struts; grade 3 = invisible struts. Heterogeneity was judged when the NIC grade varied ≥ 1. In-stent late loss (0.06 ± 0.23 vs. 0.07 ± 0.18 mm, P = 0.80), and dominant NIC grade (1.5 ± 0.8 vs. 1.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.45) were similar for BES and SES. Within the stents, NIC was more heterogeneous in SES than in BES (P = 0.035). 80% of BES showed homogeneous NIC, while 56% of SES had heterogeneous NIC. CONCLUSIONS: BES showed limited late loss similar to that for SES. Nonetheless, the NIC with BES was more homogeneous than that with SES. Biodegradable polymer-coated BES may have an advantage in homogeneous NIC.
BACKGROUND: Second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are expected to show better arterial repair than older DES. We angioscopically compared the biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus A9-eluting stent (BES) and durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) to explore differences in arterial repair. METHODS AND RESULTS: Angioscopy was performed 9 ± 1 months after 15 BES and 16 SES were implanted initially in the native coronary artery. Heterogeneity of neointimal coverage (NIC) as well as the dominant NIC grade was examined. NIC was defined as: grade 0 = fully visible struts; grade 1 = struts bulging into the lumen, but covered; grade 2 = embedded, but translucent struts; grade 3 = invisible struts. Heterogeneity was judged when the NIC grade varied ≥ 1. In-stent late loss (0.06 ± 0.23 vs. 0.07 ± 0.18 mm, P = 0.80), and dominant NIC grade (1.5 ± 0.8 vs. 1.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.45) were similar for BES and SES. Within the stents, NIC was more heterogeneous in SES than in BES (P = 0.035). 80% of BES showed homogeneous NIC, while 56% of SES had heterogeneous NIC. CONCLUSIONS:BES showed limited late loss similar to that for SES. Nonetheless, the NIC with BES was more homogeneous than that with SES. Biodegradable polymer-coated BES may have an advantage in homogeneous NIC.