Literature DB >> 29089314

Three-Year Outcomes With the Absorb Bioresorbable Scaffold: Individual-Patient-Data Meta-Analysis From the ABSORB Randomized Trials.

Ziad A Ali1,2, Runlin Gao3, Takeshi Kimura4, Yoshinobu Onuma5, Dean J Kereiakes6, Stephen G Ellis7, Bernard Chevalier8, Minh-Thien Vu9, Zhen Zhang9, Charles A Simonton9, Patrick W Serruys10, Gregg W Stone11,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) completely resorbs within 3 years after coronary artery implantation. The safety and effectiveness of BVS through this critical 3-year period have not been characterized.
METHODS: We performed an individual-patient-data pooled meta-analysis of the 4 randomized ABSORB trials in which 3389 patients with coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to everolimus-eluting Absorb BVS (n=2164) or cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (n=1225). The primary efficacy outcome measure was target lesion failure (cardiac mortality, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization), and the primary safety outcome measure was device thrombosis.
RESULTS: BVS compared with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents resulted in higher 3-year rates of target lesion failure (11.7% versus 8.1%; risk ratio [RR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.73; P=0.006), driven by greater target vessel myocardial infarction (7.8% versus 4.2%; RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.26-2.35; P=0.0006) and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (6.6% versus 4.4%; RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.05-1.98; P=0.02), with comparable cardiac mortality (1.1% versus 1.1%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.47-1.88; P=0.85). Device thrombosis rates through 3 years were also higher with BVS (2.4% versus 0.6%; RR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.70-8.11; P=0.001). Between 1 and 3 years, target lesion failure rates (6.1% versus 3.9%; P=0.02) and device thrombosis rates (1.1% versus 0.0%; P<0.0001) were higher with BVS than cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents.
CONCLUSIONS: In the present individual-patient-data pooled meta-analysis of the ABSORB trials, BVS was associated with increased rates of target lesion failure and device thrombosis between 1 and 3 years and cumulatively through 3 years of follow-up compared with everolimus-eluting stents. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01751906, NCT01844284, NCT01923740, and NCT01425281.
© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  coronary artery disease; drug-eluting stents; meta-analysis [publication type]; percutaneous coronary intervention; stents

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29089314     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.031843

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  26 in total

Review 1.  The Current Literature on Bioabsorbable Stents: a Review.

Authors:  Wally A Omar; Dharam J Kumbhani
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 5.113

Review 2.  Coronary Stent Thrombosis- Predictors and Prevention.

Authors:  Helen Ullrich; Thomas Münzel; Tommaso Gori
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 5.594

3.  Optical coherence tomography evaluation of the absorb bioresorbable scaffold performance for overlap versus non-overlap segments in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion: insight from the GHOST-CTO registry.

Authors:  Gabriel T R Pereira; Alessio La Manna; Yasuhiro Ichibori; Armando Vergara-Martel; Bruno Ramos Nascimento; Abdul Jawwad Samdani; Davide Capodanno; Guido D'Agosta; Giacomo Gravina; Giuseppe Venuti; Corrado Tamburino; Guilherme F Attizzani
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2019-06-07       Impact factor: 2.357

4.  The year in cardiology 2018: coronary interventions.

Authors:  Dariusz Dudek; Artur Dziewierz; Gregg Stone; William Wijns
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  Comparison between treatment of "established" versus complex "off-label" coronary lesions with Absorb® bioresorbable scaffold implantation: results from the GABI-R® registry.

Authors:  Aydin Huseynov; Stefan Baumann; Holger Nef; Thomas Riemer; Steffen Schneider; Thomas Pfannenbecker; Stephan Achenbach; Julinda Mehilli; Thomas Münzel; Tommaso Gori; Jochen Wöhrle; Ralf Zahn; Johannes Kastner; Axel Schmermund; Gert Richardt; Christian W Hamm; Ibrahim Akin
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2019-06-29       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  Long-term results of long segment coronary artery lesions overlapped with novolimus-eluting DESolve scaffold: Disappointment or futuristic?

Authors:  Ersin İbişoğlu; Sinem Çakal; Beytullah Çakal; H Murat Güneş; Bedrettin Boyraz; Bilal Boztosun
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.596

7.  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

8.  Long-Term Outcomes After Implantation of Magnesium-Based Bioresorbable Scaffolds-Insights From an All-Comer Registry.

Authors:  Matthias Bossard; Mehdi Madanchi; Dardan Avdijaj; Adrian Attinger-Toller; Giacomo Maria Cioffi; Thomas Seiler; Gregorio Tersalvi; Richard Kobza; Guido Schüpfer; Florim Cuculi
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-04-14

9.  Scaffold Resorption Process Is Not the Achilles' Heel of the Absorb BVS: But What Then?

Authors:  Laura S M Kerkmeijer; Joanna J Wykrzykowska
Journal:  JACC Basic Transl Sci       Date:  2020-06-22

10.  Three-years outcomes of diabetic patients treated with coronary bioresorbable scaffolds.

Authors:  Remzi Anadol; Katharina Schnitzler; Liv Lorenz; Melissa Weissner; Helen Ullrich; Alberto Polimeni; Thomas Münzel; Tommaso Gori
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 2.298

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.