Literature DB >> 30266412

Blinded outcomes and angina assessment of coronary bioresorbable scaffolds: 30-day and 1-year results from the ABSORB IV randomised trial.

Gregg W Stone1, Stephen G Ellis2, Tommaso Gori3, D Christopher Metzger4, Bernardo Stein5, Matthew Erickson6, Jan Torzewski7, Jerome Williams8, William Lawson9, Thomas M Broderick10, Ameer Kabour11, Guy Piegari12, Jeffrey Cavendish13, Barry Bertolet14, James W Choi15, Steven O Marx16, Philippe Généreux17, Dean J Kereiakes10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies showed more adverse events with coronary bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) than with metallic drug-eluting stents (DES), although in one randomised trial angina was reduced with BVS. However, these early studies were unmasked, lesions smaller than intended for the scaffold were frequently enrolled, implantation technique was suboptimal, and patients with myocardial infarction, in whom BVS might be well suited, were excluded.
METHODS: In the active-controlled, blinded, multicentre, randomised ABSORB IV trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes aged 18 years or older were recruited from 147 hospitals in five countries (the USA, Germany, Australia, Singapore, and Canada). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive polymeric everolimus-eluting BVS (Absorb; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) with optimised implantation technique or cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (EES; Xience; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Randomisation was stratified by diabetic status, whether patients would have been eligible for enrolment in the previous ABSORB III trial, and site. Patients and clinical assessors were masked to randomisation. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation) at 30 days, tested for non-inferiority with a 2·9% margin for the risk difference. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02173379, and is closed to accrual.
FINDINGS: Between Aug 15, 2014, and March 31, 2017, we screened 18 722 patients for eligibility, 2604 of whom were enrolled. 1296 patients were assigned to BVS, and 1308 patients were assigned to EES. Follow-up data at 30 days and 1 year, respectively, were available for 1288 and 1254 patients with BVS and for 1303 and 1272 patients with EES. Biomarker-positive acute coronary syndromes were present in 622 (24%) of 2602 patients, and, by angiographic core laboratory analysis, 78 (3%) of 2893 of lesions were in very small vessels. Target lesion failure at 30 days occurred in 64 (5·0%) patients assigned to BVS and 48 (3·7%) patients assigned to EES (difference 1·3%, upper 97·5% confidence limit 2·89; one-sided pnon-inferiority=0·0244). Target lesion failure at 1 year occurred in 98 (7·8%) patients assigned to BVS and 82 (6·4%) patients assigned to EES (difference 1·4%, upper 97·5% confidence limit 3·4; one-sided pnon-inferiority=0·0006). Angina, adjudicated by a central events committee at 1 year, occurred in 270 (20·3%) patients assigned to BVS and 274 (20·5%) patients assigned to EES (difference -0·3%, 95% CI -3·4% to 2·9%; one-sided pnon-inferiority=0·0008; two-sided psuperiority=0·8603). Device thrombosis within 1 year occurred in nine (0·7%) patients assigned to BVS and four (0·3%) patients assigned to EES (p=0·1586).
INTERPRETATION: Polymeric BVS implanted with optimised technique in an expanded patient population resulted in non-inferior 30-day and 1-year rates of target lesion failure and angina compared with metallic DES. FUNDING: Abbott Vascular.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30266412     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32283-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  25 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

2.  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

Review 3.  Recent Advances in Stent Technology: Do They Reduce Cardiovascular Events?

Authors:  Allen J Weiss; Marta Lorente-Ros; Ashish Correa; Nitin Barman; Jacqueline E Tamis-Holland
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 5.967

4.  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

Review 5.  Critical evaluation of stents in coronary angioplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  Joseph Robert Stevens; Ava Zamani; James Ian Atkins Osborne; Reza Zamani; Mohammad Akrami
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 2.819

6.  Efficacy and safety of bioresorbable scaffolds in patients with coronary bifurcation lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xi-Ying Liang; Yan Li; Wen-Jiao Zhang; Xuan Qiao; Rong-Rong Yang; Zhi-Lu Wang
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2021-04-12       Impact factor: 3.487

7.  A randomized controlled trial of a physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention optimization strategy: Rationale and design of the TARGET FFR study.

Authors:  Damien Collison; John D McClure; Colin Berry; Keith G Oldroyd
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 8.  Recent Advances in Bioplastics: Application and Biodegradation.

Authors:  Tanja Narancic; Federico Cerrone; Niall Beagan; Kevin E O'Connor
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 4.329

Review 9.  The Future of Cardiovascular Stents: Bioresorbable and Integrated Biosensor Technology.

Authors:  Daniel Hoare; Anubhav Bussooa; Steven Neale; Nosrat Mirzai; John Mercer
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 16.806

10.  Three-year outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus second-generation drug-eluting stents: Meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Authors:  Junsong Ke; Hongyu Zhang; Jun Huang; Ping Lv; Yun Chen; Kai Xu; Wenxue Yang; Bangyan Tu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.