eISSN: 1897-4295
ISSN: 1734-9338
Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Subscription Contact Instructions for authors Publication charge Ethical standards and procedures
Editorial System
Submit your Manuscript
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
2/2018
vol. 14
 
Share:
Share:
abstract:
Original paper

Comparison of the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold to the Xience durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent in routine clinical practice: a propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter registry

Bartłomiej Orlik
,
Krzysztof Milewski
,
Kamil Derbisz
,
Michał Jelonek
,
Patrycja Chrząszcz
,
Sonia Beil
,
Adam Młodziankowski
,
Wojciech Picheta
,
Piotr P. Buszman
,
Paweł E. Buszman

Adv Interv Cardiol 2018; 14, 2 (52): 149–156
Online publish date: 2018/06/19
View full text Get citation
 
Introduction
Most clinical trials related to bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) technology are limited to a highly selected patient population.

Aim
To evaluate early and long-term clinical outcomes of the Absorb everolimus-eluting BVS compared to the everolimus-eluting metallic XIENCE V stent in routine clinical practice.

Material and methods
This is a multicenter, retrospective propensity score-matched comparative study, comprising 76 patients treated with a bare metal stents (BMS) and 501 with a XIENCE stent. Patients included in the study had stable and unstable angina and both types of myocardial infarction (STEMI and NSTEMI) as an indication for intervention and at least one significant de novo lesion in native coronary arteries. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR).

Results
Median follow-up was 400 days in both groups. After propensity score matching for patient baseline characteristics, only higher rate of predilatation, predominantly treated left anterior descending artery (LAD) and lower number of used stents in the BVS group remained statistically significant. After adjustment there was no difference in type of treated lesions. The MACE rate did not differ between BVS and drug-eluting stents (DES) groups (7.2% vs. 11.15%, respectively; p = 0.17). The TVR was 2.9% in both groups. Except in the periprocedural period, there were no deaths or MI in the BVS group. There was no stent thrombosis in either studied group.

Conclusions
In routine clinical practice throughout long-term follow-up, clinical outcomes of patients who successfully received the Absorb BVS did not differ from those of patients who received the Xience stent. Longer follow-up data are required to determine whether these findings will persist beyond one year.

keywords:

acute coronary syndrome, drug-eluting stent, stable angina, bioresorbable vascular scaffold, coronary percutaneous intervention

Quick links
© 2024 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Bentus.