Elisabetta Moscarella1, Alfonso Ielasi2, Francesco Granata2, Sebastian Coscarelli2, Eugenio Stabile2, Azeem Latib2, Bernardo Cortese2, Maurizio Tespili2, Akihito Tanaka2, Claudia Capozzolo2, Luigi Caliendo2, Antonio Colombo2, Attilio Varricchio2. 1. From the Department of Cardio-Thoracic Science, Second University of Naples, Presidio Ospedaliero "Monaldi", Azienda Ospedaliera Dei Colli, Napoli, Italy (E.M.); Cardiology Division, Azienda Ospedaliera Bolognini Seriate, Bergamo, Italy (A.I., M.T.); Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Santa Maria della Pietà Hospital, Nola, Napoli, Italy (F.G., L.C., A.V.); Cardiovascular Intervention Unit, San Martino Hospital, Belluno, Italy (S.C.); Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche Avanzate, Università degli Studi "Federico II", Napoli, Italy (E.S.); Interventional Cardiology Unit, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus ed Ospedale San Raffaele, Milano, Italy (A.L., A.T., A.C.); Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Fatebenefratelli, Milano, Italy (B.C.); and Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Department of Cardiology, Presidio Ospedaliero "Monaldi", Azienda Ospedaliera Dei Colli, Napoli, Italy (C.C.). elisabetta.moscarella@gmail.com. 2. From the Department of Cardio-Thoracic Science, Second University of Naples, Presidio Ospedaliero "Monaldi", Azienda Ospedaliera Dei Colli, Napoli, Italy (E.M.); Cardiology Division, Azienda Ospedaliera Bolognini Seriate, Bergamo, Italy (A.I., M.T.); Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Santa Maria della Pietà Hospital, Nola, Napoli, Italy (F.G., L.C., A.V.); Cardiovascular Intervention Unit, San Martino Hospital, Belluno, Italy (S.C.); Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche Avanzate, Università degli Studi "Federico II", Napoli, Italy (E.S.); Interventional Cardiology Unit, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus ed Ospedale San Raffaele, Milano, Italy (A.L., A.T., A.C.); Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Fatebenefratelli, Milano, Italy (B.C.); and Laboratory of Invasive Cardiology, Department of Cardiology, Presidio Ospedaliero "Monaldi", Azienda Ospedaliera Dei Colli, Napoli, Italy (C.C.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is still challenging. In this setting, the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) seems attractive because it allows drug delivery combined with transient vessel scaffolding. We aimed to investigate the long-term results after BVS use in ISR lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective analysis was performed on all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with BVS implantation for ISR at 7 Italian Centers. Primary end point was the device-oriented composite end point (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) at the longest follow-up available. From April 2012 to June 2014, 116 patients (127 lesions) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for ISR with BVS implantation. Among the ISR lesions, the majority were drug-eluting stent ISR (78, 61.6%), de novo ISR (92, 72.4%), and diffuse ISR (81, 63.8%). Procedural success was achieved for all (100%) patients. No in-hospital death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization occurred. At 15 months of follow-up, the incidence of the device-oriented composite end point estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method was 9.1%. No significant differences were reported between drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent ISR groups in terms of device-oriented composite end point (10.9% versus 6.4%; hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-6.5; P=0.425) and its singular components (cardiac death: 2.8% versus 2.0%, hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-14.1, P=0.843; target vessel myocardial infarction: 1.5% versus 0%, P=0.421; ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization: 9.6% versus 4.4%, hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-10.8, P=0.309). CONCLUSIONS: Our registry suggests that the use of BVS implantation for the treatment of complex drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent ISR lesions might be associated with acceptable long-term clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is still challenging. In this setting, the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) seems attractive because it allows drug delivery combined with transient vessel scaffolding. We aimed to investigate the long-term results after BVS use in ISR lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective analysis was performed on all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with BVS implantation for ISR at 7 Italian Centers. Primary end point was the device-oriented composite end point (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) at the longest follow-up available. From April 2012 to June 2014, 116 patients (127 lesions) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for ISR with BVS implantation. Among the ISR lesions, the majority were drug-eluting stent ISR (78, 61.6%), de novo ISR (92, 72.4%), and diffuse ISR (81, 63.8%). Procedural success was achieved for all (100%) patients. No in-hospital death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization occurred. At 15 months of follow-up, the incidence of the device-oriented composite end point estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method was 9.1%. No significant differences were reported between drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent ISR groups in terms of device-oriented composite end point (10.9% versus 6.4%; hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-6.5; P=0.425) and its singular components (cardiac death: 2.8% versus 2.0%, hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-14.1, P=0.843; target vessel myocardial infarction: 1.5% versus 0%, P=0.421; ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization: 9.6% versus 4.4%, hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-10.8, P=0.309). CONCLUSIONS: Our registry suggests that the use of BVS implantation for the treatment of complex drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent ISR lesions might be associated with acceptable long-term clinical outcomes.
Authors: Grzegorz Zuk; Dariusz Ciecwierz; Piotr Drewla; Marcin Gruchała; Juan Luis Gutiérrez-Chico; Milosz Jaguszewski Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2019 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: Jung Min Ahn; Duk Woo Park; Sung Jin Hong; Young Keun Ahn; Joo Yong Hahn; Won Jang Kim; Soon Jun Hong; Chang Wook Nam; Do Yoon Kang; Seung Yul Lee; Woo Jung Chun; Jung Ho Heo; Deok Kyu Cho; Jin Won Kim; Sung Ho Her; Sang Wook Kim; Sang Yong Yoo; Myeong Ki Hong; Seung Jea Tahk; Kee Sik Kim; Moo Hyun Kim; Yangsoo Jang; Seung Jung Park Journal: Korean Circ J Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 3.243
Authors: Annunziata Nusca; Michele Mattia Viscusi; Francesco Piccirillo; Aurelio De Filippis; Antonio Nenna; Cristiano Spadaccio; Francesco Nappi; Camilla Chello; Fabio Mangiacapra; Francesco Grigioni; Massimo Chello; Gian Paolo Ussia Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-03-08