Matjaž Bunc1, Miha Mrak2, Peter Rakovec3. 1. Department for Cardiology, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Gubčeve brigade 11, SI-1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 2. Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 3. Department for Cardiology, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Gubčeve brigade 11, SI-1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia. peter.rakovec@telemach.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) could overcome drug-eluting stents (DES) drawbacks connected with their permanent presence in the vessel wall. Studies exploring the clinical use of BVS are limited to the patients presenting with noncomplex, short and stable lesions. There are no prospective and randomized studies available in all-comer patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 31 patients, who received at least one BVS (Absorb(™)) between September 1, 2012 and November 1, 2014. Median follow-up period was 424 days. In one (3.2%) patient, we performed a target vessel revascularization (TVR). The death rate was 6.5%. One (3.2%) patient, who received both BVS and a bare metal stent (BMS), died of an acute stent thrombosis 8 days after the initial procedure. One (3.2%) patient died of a non-cardiac death. We did not encounter any target lesion revascularization (TLR) or myocardial infarction (MI). The major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate was 3.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of BVS is a safe treatment option. Lesions should be carefully selected and prepared before BVS implantation. We need more data about the safety of BVS and BMS overlapping.
BACKGROUND: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) could overcome drug-eluting stents (DES) drawbacks connected with their permanent presence in the vessel wall. Studies exploring the clinical use of BVS are limited to the patients presenting with noncomplex, short and stable lesions. There are no prospective and randomized studies available in all-comer patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 31 patients, who received at least one BVS (Absorb(™)) between September 1, 2012 and November 1, 2014. Median follow-up period was 424 days. In one (3.2%) patient, we performed a target vessel revascularization (TVR). The death rate was 6.5%. One (3.2%) patient, who received both BVS and a bare metal stent (BMS), died of an acute stent thrombosis 8 days after the initial procedure. One (3.2%) patient died of a non-cardiac death. We did not encounter any target lesion revascularization (TLR) or myocardial infarction (MI). The major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate was 3.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of BVS is a safe treatment option. Lesions should be carefully selected and prepared before BVS implantation. We need more data about the safety of BVS and BMS overlapping.
Authors: Fernando Rivero; Teresa Bastante; Javier Cuesta; Amparo Benedicto; Jorge A Restrepo; Fernando Alfonso Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2014-11-22 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Patrick W Serruys; Bernard Chevalier; Dariusz Dudek; Angel Cequier; Didier Carrié; Andres Iniguez; Marcello Dominici; René J van der Schaaf; Michael Haude; Luc Wasungu; Susan Veldhof; Lei Peng; Peter Staehr; Maik J Grundeken; Yuki Ishibashi; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; Yoshinobu Onuma Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-09-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Yoshinobu Onuma; Dariusz Dudek; Leif Thuesen; Mark Webster; Koen Nieman; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; John A Ormiston; Patrick W Serruys Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Salvatore Brugaletta; Tommaso Gori; Adrian F Low; Petr Tousek; Eduardo Pinar; Josep Gomez-Lara; Giancarla Scalone; Eberhard Schulz; Mark Y Chan; Viktor Kocka; Jose Hurtado; Juan Antoni Gomez-Hospital; Thomas Münzel; Chi-Hang Lee; Angel Cequier; Mariano Valdés; Petr Widimsky; Patrick W Serruys; Manel Sabaté Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 11.195