Literature DB >> 22030265

Angiographic maximal luminal diameter and appropriate deployment of the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold as assessed by optical coherence tomography: an ABSORB cohort B trial sub-study.

Josep Gomez-Lara1, Roberto Diletti, Salvatore Brugaletta, Yoshinobu Onuma, Vasim Farooq, Leif Thuesen, Dougal McClean, Jacques Koolen, John A Ormiston, Stefan Windecker, Robert Whitbourn, Dariusz Dudek, Cécile Dorange, Susan Veldhof, Richard Rapoza, Evelyn Regar, Hector M Garcia-Garcia, Patrick W Serruys.   

Abstract

AIMS: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) present different mechanical properties as compared to metallic platform stents. Therefore, the standard procedural technique to achieve appropriate deployment may differ. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Fifty-two lesions treated with a 3 x 18 mm BVS were imaged with optical coherence tomography (OCT) post-implantation and screened for parameters suggesting non-optimal deployment. These included minimal scaffold area (minSA)<5 mm², residual area stenosis (RAS)>20%, edge dissections, incomplete scaffold/strut apposition (ISA)>5% and scaffold pattern irregularities. The angiographic proximal and distal maximal lumen diameters (DMAX) were measured by quantitative coronary angiography. Based on the DMAX values, the population was divided into three groups: DMAX <2.5 mm (n=13), DMAX between 2.5-3.3 mm (n=30) and DMAX >3.3 mm (n=9). All three groups presented with similar pre-implantation angiographic characteristics except for the vessel size and were treated with similar balloon/artery ratios. The group with a DMAX <2.5 mm presented with a higher percentage of lesions with minSA <5 mm² (30.8% vs. 10.0% vs. 0%; p=0.08) and edge dissections (61.5% vs. 33.3% vs. 11.1%; p=0.05). Lesions with >5% of ISA were significantly higher in the group with DMAX >3.3 mm (7.7% vs. 36.7% vs. 66.7%; p=0.02). RAS >20% was similar between all groups (46.2 vs. 53.3 vs. 77.8%; p=0.47) and scaffold pattern irregularities were only documented in three cases.
CONCLUSIONS: BVS implantation guided with quantitative angiography may improve the OCT findings of optimal deployment. The clinical significance of these angiographic and OCT findings warranted long term follow-up of larger cohort of patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22030265     DOI: 10.4244/EIJV8I2A35

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  EuroIntervention        ISSN: 1774-024X            Impact factor:   6.534


  9 in total

Review 1.  Optical coherence tomography guidance during bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation.

Authors:  Gioel Gabrio Secco; Monica Verdoia; Gianfranco Pistis; Giuseppe De Luca; Matteo Vercellino; Andrea Audo; Rosario Parisi; Maurizio Reale; Giorgio Ballestrero; Paolo Nicola Marino; Carlo Di Mario
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  The Bioresorbable Stent in Perspective-How Much of an Advance is It?

Authors:  Viktor Kočka; Petr Widimský
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2014-03

3.  Bioresorbable Scaffolds.

Authors:  Sidakpal Panaich; Theodore Schreiber; Cindy Grines
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2014-08

4.  Post-dilatation after implantation of bioresorbable everolimus- and novolimus-eluting scaffolds: an observational optical coherence tomography study of acute mechanical effects.

Authors:  Florian Blachutzik; Niklas Boeder; Jens Wiebe; Alessio Mattesini; Oliver Dörr; Astrid Most; Timm Bauer; Jens Röther; Monique Tröbs; Christian Schlundt; Stephan Achenbach; Christian W Hamm; Holger M Nef
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 5.460

5.  Cutting balloon use may ease the optimal apposition of bioresorbable vascular scaffold in in-stent stenosis.

Authors:  Ahmet Karabulut; Yasemin Demirci
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 1.426

Review 6.  Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Korean Expert Panel Report.

Authors:  Jung Min Ahn; Duk Woo Park; Sung Jin Hong; Young Keun Ahn; Joo Yong Hahn; Won Jang Kim; Soon Jun Hong; Chang Wook Nam; Do Yoon Kang; Seung Yul Lee; Woo Jung Chun; Jung Ho Heo; Deok Kyu Cho; Jin Won Kim; Sung Ho Her; Sang Wook Kim; Sang Yong Yoo; Myeong Ki Hong; Seung Jea Tahk; Kee Sik Kim; Moo Hyun Kim; Yangsoo Jang; Seung Jung Park
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 3.243

7.  Comparison of clinical outcomes between intravascular optical coherence tomography-guided and angiography-guided stent implantation: A meta-analysis of randomized control trials and systematic review.

Authors:  Yu Jiang; Li-Peng He; Ren Gong; Guang-Tao Lei; Yan-Qing Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Biodegradable vascular scaffold ABSORB BVS™ - scientific evidence and methods of implantation.

Authors:  Lukasz Rzeszutko; Rafał Depukat; Dariusz Dudek
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 1.426

9.  What is better for predilatation in bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: a non-compliant or a compliant balloon?

Authors:  Erdem Özel; Ahmet Taştan; Ali Öztürk; Emin Evren Özcan; Samet Uyar; Ömer Şenarslan
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 1.596

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.