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.
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.
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
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
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