Literature DB >> 26916481

Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold Thrombosis: Multicenter Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Presentation, Mechanisms, and Predictors.

Serban Puricel1, Florim Cuculi2, Melissa Weissner3, Axel Schmermund4, Peiman Jamshidi2, Tobias Nyffenegger2, Harald Binder5, Holger Eggebrecht4, Thomas Münzel3, Stephane Cook1, Tommaso Gori6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest an elevated incidence of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) thrombosis (scaffold thrombosis [ScT]).
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated occurrence rates, clinical and angiographic characteristics, and possible mechanisms of ScT in all-comer patients undergoing BVS implantation at 2 German and 2 Swiss hospitals.
METHODS: A total of 1,305 consecutive patients (mean age 64 years, 78% male) who received 1,870 BVS (mean 1.4 ± 0.8 BVS/patient) were enrolled. Clinical/procedural characteristics, mortality, and ScT data at 485 days (range 312 to 652 days) were examined.
RESULTS: ScT occurred in 42 patients. The incidence of probable and definite ScT was 1.8% at 30 days and 3.0% at 12 months, without differences among centers (p = 0.60). A total of 22 (52%) ScTs presented as ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 6 (17%) as sudden cardiac death. In multivariable analysis, ostial lesions (p = 0.049) and impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (p = 0.019) were independently associated with ScT. Nine (21%) of the ScTs occurred in patients who had suspended dual antiplatelet therapy, in 6 cases prematurely. Lower post-procedural minimum lumen and reference vessel diameters were hallmarks of ScT (all p < 0.0001). The risk of ScT appeared to rapidly increase for post-procedural minimum lumen diameters below 2.4 mm (for the 2.5- to 3.0-mm BVS) and 2.8 mm (for the 3.5-mm BVS). When a BVS-specific implantation strategy was implemented, 12-month ScT rates fell from 3.3% to 1.0%, an effect that remained significant when adjusted for multivariable propensity score (p = 0.012; hazard ratio: 0.19; 95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.70).
CONCLUSIONS: The 12-month incidence of ScT reached 3% and could be significantly reduced when an optimized implantation strategy was employed. (retrospective multicentric registry and Mainz Intracoronary Database. The Coronary Slow-flow and Microvascular Diseases Registry [MICAT]; NCT02180178).
Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioresorbable scaffold; stent thrombosis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26916481     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  61 in total

1.  Long-term clinical results of biodegradable vascular scaffold ABSORB BVS™ using the PSP-technique in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Jarosław Hiczkiewicz; Sylwia Iwańczyk; Aleksander Araszkiewicz; Magdalena Łanocha; Dariusz Hiczkiewicz; Stefan Grajek; Maciej Lesiak
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 2.737

2.  How far have we come with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds, and where should we go?

Authors:  Jeehoon Kang; Kyung Woo Park; Hyo Soo Kim
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-06

3.  Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for complex coronary anatomies: "Icarus' flight" for interventional cardiologists?

Authors:  Salvatore Cassese; Adnan Kastrati; Massimiliano Fusaro
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-06

4.  New insight to estimate under-expansion after stent implantation on bifurcation lesions using optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Daisuke Nakamura; Guilherme F Attizzani; Setsu Nishino; Kentaro Tanaka; Mohamad Soud; Gabriel T Pereira; Milana Leygerman; Anas Fares; Audrey Schnell; Marco A Costa; Andrejs Erglis; Hiram G Bezerra
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  Bioresorbable scaffolds: should we stay simple or go complex?

Authors:  Luis Ortega-Paz; Salvatore Brugaletta; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; Manel Sabaté
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-06

Review 6.  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 7.  Bioresorbable Polymers and Stent Devices.

Authors:  Payam Dehghani
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-02

8.  Adverse events with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in routine percutaneous coronary interventions: "coup de théâtre" or unfinished play?

Authors:  Salvatore Cassese; Oliver Husser; Adnan Kastrati
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Bioresorbable scaffolds versus metallic stents in routine PCI: the plot thickens.

Authors:  Athanasios Katsikis; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.895

10.  Time-Varying Outcomes With the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold During 5-Year Follow-up: A Systematic Meta-analysis and Individual Patient Data Pooled Study.

Authors:  Gregg W Stone; Takeshi Kimura; Runlin Gao; Dean J Kereiakes; Stephen G Ellis; Yoshinobu Onuma; Bernard Chevalier; Charles Simonton; Ovidiu Dressler; Aaron Crowley; Ziad A Ali; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 14.676

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.