Charis Costopoulos1, Matthew C Crowson2, Adam J Brown1, Denise M Braganza2, Martin R Bennett3, Stephen P Hoole2, Nick E J West4. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology, Papworth Hospital NHS Trust, UK. 2. Department of Interventional Cardiology, Papworth Hospital NHS Trust, UK. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK. 4. Department of Interventional Cardiology, Papworth Hospital NHS Trust, UK. Electronic address: nick.west@papworth.nhs.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Available data on the use of the ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) in real-world patients is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the mid-term clinical outcomes in a real-world population treated with ABSORB BVS. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively evaluated all patients treated with ABSORB at Papworth Hospital, Papworth Everard, UK between July 2012 and July 2014. A total of 108 patients (126 lesions) were identified. Clinical follow-up was performed on all subjects by clinic visit or telephone interview. RESULTS: Most patients were male (91.7%) with a relative high incidence of previous myocardial infarction (MI) (40.7%). Clinical presentation was equally divided between stable angina and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (51.8% vs. 48.2%, p=0.59). Of the ACS patients, 26.9% presented with ST-elevation myocardial MI. Intravascular imaging was used in all cases. Predilatation (92.9%) and postdilatation (82.5%) were frequently performed. Major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates defined as the composite of all-cause death, follow-up MI and target vessel revascularization were 2.5% at 6-month and 4.5% at 1-year. The 1-year target lesion failure rate, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target-vessel MI and target lesion revascularization was 1.9%. There was 1 case of subacute stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ABSORB BVS in real-world patients appears to be associated with good mid-term clinical outcomes when guided by intravascular imaging. Larger studies are required to evaluate further the role of BVS in routine clinical practice and examine how this compares to metallic devices. SUMMARY: Available data on the use of the ABSORB BVS in real-world patients is limited. We retrospectively evaluated all patients treated with ABSORB BVS between July 2012 and July 2014. A total of 108 patients (126 lesions) were identified. Clinical presentation was equally divided between stable angina and acute coronary syndrome (51.8% vs. 48.2%, p=0.59). Predilatation (92.9%) and postdilatation (82.5%) were frequently performed. Estimated MACE rates at 6-month and 1-year were 2.5% and 4.5% respectively, with a 1-year TLF rate of 1.9%. These results suggest that the use of ABSORB BVS use in the real-world is associated with good mid-term clinical outcomes when guided by intravascular imaging.
BACKGROUND: Available data on the use of the ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) in real-world patients is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the mid-term clinical outcomes in a real-world population treated with ABSORB BVS. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively evaluated all patients treated with ABSORB at Papworth Hospital, Papworth Everard, UK between July 2012 and July 2014. A total of 108 patients (126 lesions) were identified. Clinical follow-up was performed on all subjects by clinic visit or telephone interview. RESULTS: Most patients were male (91.7%) with a relative high incidence of previous myocardial infarction (MI) (40.7%). Clinical presentation was equally divided between stable angina and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (51.8% vs. 48.2%, p=0.59). Of the ACS patients, 26.9% presented with ST-elevation myocardial MI. Intravascular imaging was used in all cases. Predilatation (92.9%) and postdilatation (82.5%) were frequently performed. Major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates defined as the composite of all-cause death, follow-up MI and target vessel revascularization were 2.5% at 6-month and 4.5% at 1-year. The 1-year target lesion failure rate, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target-vessel MI and target lesion revascularization was 1.9%. There was 1 case of subacute stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ABSORB BVS in real-world patients appears to be associated with good mid-term clinical outcomes when guided by intravascular imaging. Larger studies are required to evaluate further the role of BVS in routine clinical practice and examine how this compares to metallic devices. SUMMARY: Available data on the use of the ABSORB BVS in real-world patients is limited. We retrospectively evaluated all patients treated with ABSORB BVS between July 2012 and July 2014. A total of 108 patients (126 lesions) were identified. Clinical presentation was equally divided between stable angina and acute coronary syndrome (51.8% vs. 48.2%, p=0.59). Predilatation (92.9%) and postdilatation (82.5%) were frequently performed. Estimated MACE rates at 6-month and 1-year were 2.5% and 4.5% respectively, with a 1-year TLF rate of 1.9%. These results suggest that the use of ABSORB BVS use in the real-world is associated with good mid-term clinical outcomes when guided by intravascular imaging.