Clinical results of bioresorbable drug-eluting scaffolds in short and long coronary artery lesions using the PSP technique.
Absorbable Implants
Aged
Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary
/ adverse effects
Cardiovascular Agents
/ administration & dosage
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
Coronary Artery Disease
/ diagnostic imaging
Coronary Thrombosis
/ mortality
Everolimus
/ administration & dosage
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Myocardial Infarction
/ mortality
Prosthesis Design
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Absorb scaffold
Follow-up
Long lesions
PSP-technique
Journal
BMC cardiovascular disorders
ISSN: 1471-2261
Titre abrégé: BMC Cardiovasc Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968539
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 01 2019
18 01 2019
Historique:
received:
08
10
2018
accepted:
26
12
2018
entrez:
20
1
2019
pubmed:
20
1
2019
medline:
18
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Data on bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) for the treatment of long lesions are limited. We studied the use of BVS-Absorb in routine clinical practice and compared the outcome of long lesions with short lesions. Implantation of drug-eluting scaffolds without PSP-technique (predilation, proper sizing and postdilation) is associated with an increased thrombotic risk. We compared the long-term outcome up to 36 months of patients with short (< 20 mm) and long (≥20 mm) coronary artery lesions after implantation of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) via PSP-technique. Three hundred twenty-six patients with 424 lesions were enrolled in this prospective study and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with the Absorb BVS. Clinical follow-up was scheduled after 12, 24 and 36 months. In all lesions the PSP-technique was used. The device oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) was defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) not clearly related to a non-target vessel and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Kaplan-Meier estimates for DOCE after 12 months were 2.63% for short lesions and 8.09% for long lesions (p = 0.0131), 5.51% vs. 11.35% (p = 0.0503) after 24 months and 8.00% vs. 18.00% (p = 0.0264) after 36 months of clinical follow-up. Kaplan-Meier estimates for TLR after 12 months were 1.46% for short and 7.69% for long lesions (p = 0.0012), 2.06% vs. 8.75% after 24 months (p = 0.0027) and 4.96% vs. 9.59% after 36 months of follow-up (p = 0.0109). Scaffold thrombosis rates were low. In long lesions compared to short ones the bioresorbable scaffold Absorb implanted with the proper PSP technique Absorb has significant higher rates of DOCE. Is 3 (non-random sample).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Data on bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) for the treatment of long lesions are limited. We studied the use of BVS-Absorb in routine clinical practice and compared the outcome of long lesions with short lesions. Implantation of drug-eluting scaffolds without PSP-technique (predilation, proper sizing and postdilation) is associated with an increased thrombotic risk. We compared the long-term outcome up to 36 months of patients with short (< 20 mm) and long (≥20 mm) coronary artery lesions after implantation of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) via PSP-technique.
METHODS
Three hundred twenty-six patients with 424 lesions were enrolled in this prospective study and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with the Absorb BVS. Clinical follow-up was scheduled after 12, 24 and 36 months. In all lesions the PSP-technique was used. The device oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) was defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) not clearly related to a non-target vessel and target lesion revascularization (TLR).
RESULTS
Kaplan-Meier estimates for DOCE after 12 months were 2.63% for short lesions and 8.09% for long lesions (p = 0.0131), 5.51% vs. 11.35% (p = 0.0503) after 24 months and 8.00% vs. 18.00% (p = 0.0264) after 36 months of clinical follow-up. Kaplan-Meier estimates for TLR after 12 months were 1.46% for short and 7.69% for long lesions (p = 0.0012), 2.06% vs. 8.75% after 24 months (p = 0.0027) and 4.96% vs. 9.59% after 36 months of follow-up (p = 0.0109). Scaffold thrombosis rates were low.
CONCLUSIONS
In long lesions compared to short ones the bioresorbable scaffold Absorb implanted with the proper PSP technique Absorb has significant higher rates of DOCE.
THE LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Is 3 (non-random sample).
Identifiants
pubmed: 30658574
doi: 10.1186/s12872-018-0994-y
pii: 10.1186/s12872-018-0994-y
pmc: PMC6339442
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cardiovascular Agents
0
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
0
Everolimus
9HW64Q8G6G
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
22Références
Eur Heart J. 2015 Dec 14;36(47):3332-42
pubmed: 26330419
Coron Artery Dis. 2019 Jan;30(1):59-66
pubmed: 30507632
Lancet. 2016 Feb 6;387(10018):537-544
pubmed: 26597771
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Sep 25;10(18):1819-1827
pubmed: 28935073
J Thorac Dis. 2017 Aug;9(Suppl 9):S914-S922
pubmed: 28894597
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 15;376(24):2319-2328
pubmed: 28402237
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Nov 1;270:113-117
pubmed: 29983253
Coron Artery Dis. 2018 Aug;29(5):389-396
pubmed: 29649071
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 12;373(20):1905-15
pubmed: 26457558
Lancet. 2016 Mar 26;387(10025):1277-89
pubmed: 26825231
Lancet. 2016 Nov 19;388(10059):2479-2491
pubmed: 27806897
EuroIntervention. 2017 Feb 20;12(14):1747-1756
pubmed: 27773862
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Jun 26;10(12):1274-1275
pubmed: 28641852
EuroIntervention. 2017 Feb 20;12(14):1684-1687
pubmed: 28119252
Am J Cardiol. 2017 Jun 15;119(12):1924-1930
pubmed: 28438304
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Oct 1;268:68-74
pubmed: 30041805
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Mar 1;67(8):921-31
pubmed: 26916481
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001 Jun 15;37(8):2215-39
pubmed: 11419905
Circulation. 2007 May 1;115(17):2344-51
pubmed: 17470709
EuroIntervention. 2015 Feb;10(10):1144-53
pubmed: 25042421
J Interv Cardiol. 2016 Feb;29(1):47-56
pubmed: 26864951
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2017 Apr - May;18(3):160-164
pubmed: 28017259
Lancet. 2015 Jan 3;385(9962):43-54
pubmed: 25230593
Can J Cardiol. 2018 Jun;34(6):752-758
pubmed: 29801740
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Dec 1;66(21):2298-2309
pubmed: 26471805
EuroIntervention. 2018 Oct 12;14(9):e1011-e1019
pubmed: 28966157
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2015 Dec 11;15:169
pubmed: 26654975
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Apr 1;208:40-5
pubmed: 26826788
EuroIntervention. 2017 Feb 20;12(14):1730-1737
pubmed: 27746400
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Feb;4(2):213-21
pubmed: 21349461
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Mar 27;10(6):560-568
pubmed: 28259663
Coron Artery Dis. 2017 Mar;28(2):120-125
pubmed: 27845998
Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2018;69(1-2):3-8
pubmed: 29630530
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Dec 1;92(7):E493-E501
pubmed: 29774986
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Jan 11;9(1):12-24
pubmed: 26762906
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Jan 1;93(1):E1-E7
pubmed: 30286520
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2016 Dec;69(12):1144-1151
pubmed: 28134094
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 May;6(5):523-32
pubmed: 23702016
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Dec 11;10(23):2363-2371
pubmed: 29216999
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2018 May 10;18(1):92
pubmed: 29743023