Literature DB >> 26708019

Angiographic and clinical outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stents in routine clinical practice: Results of the ISAR-ABSORB registry.

P Hoppmann1, S Kufner2, S Cassese2, J Wiebe2, S Schneider1, S Pinieck2, L Scheler1, I Bernlochner1, M Joner2, H Schunkert2,3, K-L Laugwitz1,3, A Kastrati2,3, R A Byrne2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to analyze angiographic and clinical results of patients undergoing BRS implantation in a real-world setting.
BACKGROUND: Angiographic and clinical outcome data from patients undergoing implantation of drug-eluting bioresorbable stents (BRS) in routine clinical practice is scant.
METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing implantation of everolimus-eluting BRS at two high-volume centers in Munich, Germany were enrolled. Data were collected prospectively. All patients were scheduled for angiographic surveillance 6-8 months after stent implantation. Quantitative coronary angiographic analysis was performed in a core laboratory. Clinical follow-up was performed to 12 months and events were adjudicated by independent assessors.
RESULTS: A total of 419 patients were studied. Mean age was 66.6 ± 10.9 years, 31.5% had diabetes mellitus, 76.1% had multivessel disease, and 39.0% presented with acute coronary syndrome; 49.0% of lesions were AHA/ACC type B2/C, 13.1% had treatment of bifurcation lesions. Mean reference vessel diameter was 2.89 ± 0.46 mm. At angiographic follow-up in-stent late loss was 0.26 ± 0.51 mm, in-segment diameter stenosis was 27.5 ± 16.1, and binary angiographic restenosis was 7.5%. At 12 months, the rate of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization was 13.1%. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 2.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of everolimus-eluting BRS in routine clinical practice is associated with high antirestenotic efficacy in patients undergoing angiographic surveillance. Overall clinical outcomes at 12 months are satisfactory though stent thrombosis rates are not insignificant. Further study with longer term follow-up and larger numbers of treated patients is required before we can be sure of the role of these devices in clinical practice.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioabsorbable devices/polymers; coronary artery disease; percutaneous coronary intervention; quantitative coronary angiography

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26708019     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.26346

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  5 in total

Review 1.  Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - basic concepts and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Ciro Indolfi; Salvatore De Rosa; Antonio Colombo
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  Are acute coronary syndromes an ideal scenario for bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation?

Authors:  Elisabetta Moscarella; Alfonso Ielasi; Maria Carmen De Angelis; Fortunato Scotto di Uccio; Enrico Cerrato; Roberta De Rosa; Gianluca Campo; Attilio Varricchio
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Drug-coated Balloon-only Angioplasty for Native Coronary Disease Instead of Stents.

Authors:  Upul Wickramarachchi; Simon Eccleshall
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2016-10

Review 4.  Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds-Dead End or Still a Rough Diamond?

Authors:  Mateusz P Jeżewski; Michał J Kubisa; Ceren Eyileten; Salvatore De Rosa; Günter Christ; Maciej Lesiak; Ciro Indolfi; Aurel Toma; Jolanta M Siller-Matula; Marek Postuła
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 4.241

5.  Hybrid rotablation and drug-eluting balloon strategy.

Authors:  Ahmed Vachiat; Mpiko Ntsekhe; Farrel Hellig
Journal:  Cardiovasc J Afr       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 1.167

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.