BACKGROUND: Currently, no data are available on the direct comparison between the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) and conventional metallic drug-eluting stents. METHODS: The ABSORB II study is a randomized, active-controlled, single-blinded, multicenter clinical trial aiming to compare the second-generation Absorb BVS with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting metallic stent. Approximately 501 subjects will be enrolled on a 2:1 randomization basis (Absorb BVS/XIENCE stent) in approximately 40 investigational sites across Europe and New Zealand. Treated lesions will be up to 2 de novo native coronary artery lesions, each located in different major epicardial vessels, all with an angiographic maximal luminal diameter between 2.25 and 3.8 mm as estimated by online quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and a lesion length of ≤48 mm. Clinical follow-up is planned at 30 and 180 days and at 1, 2, and 3 years. All subjects will undergo coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and IVUS-virtual histology at baseline (pre-device and post-device implantation) and at 2-year angiographic follow-up. The primary end point is superiority of the Absorb BVS vs XIENCE stent in terms of vasomotor reactivity of the treated segment at 2 years, defined as the QCA quantified change in the mean lumen diameter prenitrate and postnitrate administration. The coprimary end point is the noninferiority (reflex to superiority) of the QCA-derived minimum lumen diameter at 2 years postnitrate minus minimum lumen diameter postprocedure postnitrate by QCA. In addition, all subjects allocated to the Absorb BVS group will undergo multislice computed tomography imaging at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: The ABSORB II randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01425281) is designed to compare the safety, efficacy, and performance of Absorb BVS against the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of de novo native coronary artery lesions.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Currently, no data are available on the direct comparison between the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) and conventional metallic drug-eluting stents. METHODS: The ABSORB II study is a randomized, active-controlled, single-blinded, multicenter clinical trial aiming to compare the second-generation Absorb BVS with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting metallic stent. Approximately 501 subjects will be enrolled on a 2:1 randomization basis (Absorb BVS/XIENCE stent) in approximately 40 investigational sites across Europe and New Zealand. Treated lesions will be up to 2 de novo native coronary artery lesions, each located in different major epicardial vessels, all with an angiographic maximal luminal diameter between 2.25 and 3.8 mm as estimated by online quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and a lesion length of ≤48 mm. Clinical follow-up is planned at 30 and 180 days and at 1, 2, and 3 years. All subjects will undergo coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and IVUS-virtual histology at baseline (pre-device and post-device implantation) and at 2-year angiographic follow-up. The primary end point is superiority of the Absorb BVS vs XIENCE stent in terms of vasomotor reactivity of the treated segment at 2 years, defined as the QCA quantified change in the mean lumen diameter prenitrate and postnitrate administration. The coprimary end point is the noninferiority (reflex to superiority) of the QCA-derived minimum lumen diameter at 2 years postnitrate minus minimum lumen diameter postprocedure postnitrate by QCA. In addition, all subjects allocated to the Absorb BVS group will undergo multislice computed tomography imaging at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: The ABSORB II randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01425281) is designed to compare the safety, efficacy, and performance of Absorb BVS against the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of de novo native coronary artery lesions.
Authors: Franz X Kleber; Antonia Schulz; Matthias Waliszewski; Telse Hauschild; Michael Böhm; Ulrich Dietz; Bodo Cremers; Bruno Scheller; Yvonne P Clever Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 5.460