Mohammed Saad1,2,3,4, Amr Abdin2,3,4, Holger Thiele3,4, Steffen Desch3,4, Pranvera Ibrahimi1, Gerhard Wikstroem5, Martin Hoeher2, Michael Henein1. 1. Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umea University, Umea, Sweden. 2. Department of Cardiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany. 3. Medical Clinic II (Cardiology/Angiology/Intensive Care Medicine), University Heart Center Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany. 4. German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Hamburg/Kiel/Luebeck, Lübeck, Germany. 5. Department of Medical Sciences, Cardiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Abstract
AIM: We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) in daily use in a real-world patient population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between March 2013 and September 2014, 224 patients (233 lesions) were treated with BVS at a tertiary care center. Patients underwent follow-up coronary angiography 3-6 months after implantation. Clinical presentations were stable angina in 101 patients (45.1%), unstable angina in 47 (21.0%), NSTEMI in 38 (17.0%), and STEMI in 38 (17.0%) patients. Twenty-two patients (27 lesions) had chronic total occlusion (CTO). Procedural success was achieved in all patients. Two patients died in the follow-up period due to BVS thrombosis (0.9%). In-hospital death occurred in further 3 patients (1.3%) due to other causes not related to the BVS implantation. Total BVS thrombosis was 3.1% (7 patients) and there was only 1 case of relevant restenosis on angiographic follow-up. The overall incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 11 (4.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Mid-term follow-up after implantation of BVS suggests a satisfactory safety profile and low restenosis rate in routine daily practice involving a large range of complex lesions.
AIM: We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) in daily use in a real-world patient population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between March 2013 and September 2014, 224 patients (233 lesions) were treated with BVS at a tertiary care center. Patients underwent follow-up coronary angiography 3-6 months after implantation. Clinical presentations were stable angina in 101 patients (45.1%), unstable angina in 47 (21.0%), NSTEMI in 38 (17.0%), and STEMI in 38 (17.0%) patients. Twenty-two patients (27 lesions) had chronic total occlusion (CTO). Procedural success was achieved in all patients. Two patients died in the follow-up period due to BVS thrombosis (0.9%). In-hospital death occurred in further 3 patients (1.3%) due to other causes not related to the BVS implantation. Total BVS thrombosis was 3.1% (7 patients) and there was only 1 case of relevant restenosis on angiographic follow-up. The overall incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 11 (4.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Mid-term follow-up after implantation of BVS suggests a satisfactory safety profile and low restenosis rate in routine daily practice involving a large range of complex lesions.