5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds—Dead End or Still a Rough Diamond?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Percutaneous coronary interventions with stent-based restorations of vessel patency have become the gold standard in the treatment of acute coronary states. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have been designed to combine the efficiency of drug-eluting stents (DES) at the time of implantation and the advantages of a lack of foreign body afterwards. Complete resolution of the scaffold was intended to enable the restoration of vasomotor function and reduce the risk of device thrombosis. While early reports demonstrated superiority of BVS over DES, larger-scale application and longer observation exposed major concerns about their use, including lower radial strength and higher risk of thrombosis resulting in higher rate of major adverse cardiac events. Further focus on procedural details and research on the second generation of BVS with novel properties did not allow to unequivocally challenge position of DES. Nevertheless, BVS still have a chance to present superiority in distinctive indications. This review presents an outlook on the available first and second generation BVS and a summary of results of clinical trials on their use. It discusses explanations for unfavorable outcomes, proposed enhancement techniques and a potential niche for the use of BVS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references141

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis.

          Whether the two drug-eluting stents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration-a sirolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent-are associated with increased risks of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents is uncertain. Our aim was to compare the safety and effectiveness of these stents. We searched relevant sources from inception to March, 2007, and contacted investigators and manufacturers to identify randomised controlled trials in patients with coronary artery disease that compared drug-eluting with bare-metal stents, or that compared sirolimus-eluting stents head-to-head with paclitaxel-eluting stents. Safety outcomes included mortality, myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis; the effectiveness outcome was target lesion revascularisation. We included 38 trials (18,023 patients) with a follow-up of up to 4 years. Trialists and manufacturers provided additional data on clinical outcomes for 29 trials. We did a network meta-analysis with a mixed-treatment comparison method to combine direct within-trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation. Mortality was similar in the three groups: hazard ratios (HR) were 1.00 (95% credibility interval 0.82-1.25) for sirolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents, 1.03 (0.84-1.22) for paclitaxel-eluting versus bare-metal stents, and 0.96 (0.83-1.24) for sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents. Sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with the lowest risk of myocardial infarction (HR 0.81, 95% credibility interval 0.66-0.97, p=0.030 vs bare-metal stents; 0.83, 0.71-1.00, p=0.045 vs paclitaxel-eluting stents). There were no significant differences in the risk of definite stent thrombosis (0 days to 4 years). However, the risk of late definite stent thrombosis (>30 days) was increased with paclitaxel-eluting stents (HR 2.11, 95% credibility interval 1.19-4.23, p=0.017 vs bare-metal stents; 1.85, 1.02-3.85, p=0.041 vs sirolimus-eluting stents). The reduction in target lesion revascularisation seen with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents was more pronounced with sirolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (0.70, 0.56-0.84; p=0.0021). The risks of mortality associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents are similar. Sirolimus-eluting stents seem to be clinically better than bare-metal and paclitaxel-eluting stents.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Risk of Death Following Application of Paclitaxel‐Coated Balloons and Stents in the Femoropopliteal Artery of the Leg: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

            Background Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have already shown that paclitaxel‐coated balloons and stents significantly reduce the rates of vessel restenosis and target lesion revascularization after lower extremity interventions. Methods and Results A systematic review and meta‐analysis of RCTs investigating paclitaxel‐coated devices in the femoral and/or popliteal arteries was performed. The primary safety measure was all‐cause patient death. Risk ratios and risk differences were pooled with a random effects model. In all, 28 RCTs with 4663 patients (89% intermittent claudication) were analyzed. All‐cause patient death at 1 year (28 RCTs with 4432 cases) was similar between paclitaxel‐coated devices and control arms (2.3% versus 2.3% crude risk of death; risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.72–1.61). All‐cause death at 2 years (12 RCTs with 2316 cases) was significantly increased in the case of paclitaxel versus control (7.2% versus 3.8% crude risk of death; risk ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.15–2.47; —number‐needed‐to‐harm, 29 patients [95% CI, 19–59]). All‐cause death up to 5 years (3 RCTs with 863 cases) increased further in the case of paclitaxel (14.7% versus 8.1% crude risk of death; risk ratio, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.27–2.93; —number‐needed‐to‐harm, 14 patients [95% CI, 9–32]). Meta‐regression showed a significant relationship between exposure to paclitaxel (dose‐time product) and absolute risk of death (0.4±0.1% excess risk of death per paclitaxel mg‐year; P<0.001). Trial sequential analysis excluded false‐positive findings with 99% certainty (2‐sided α, 1.0%). Conclusions There is increased risk of death following application of paclitaxel‐coated balloons and stents in the femoropopliteal artery of the lower limbs. Further investigations are urgently warranted. Clinical Trial Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO. Unique identifier: CRD42018099447.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pathological correlates of late drug-eluting stent thrombosis: strut coverage as a marker of endothelialization.

              Late stent thrombosis (LST) after Cypher and Taxus drug-eluting stent placement has emerged as a major concern. Although the clinical predictors of LST have been reported, specific morphological and histological correlates of LST remain unknown. From a registry totaling 81 human autopsies of drug-eluting stents, 46 (62 lesions) had a drug-eluting stent implanted >30 days. We identified 28 lesions with thrombus and compared those with 34 of similar duration without thrombosis using computer-guided morphometric and histological analyses. LST was defined as an acute thrombus within a coronary artery stent in place >30 days. Multiple logistic generalized estimating equations modeling demonstrated that endothelialization was the best predictor of thrombosis. The morphometric parameter that best correlated with endothelialization was the ratio of uncovered to total stent struts per section. A univariable logistic generalized estimating equations model of occurrence of thrombus in a stent section versus ratio of uncovered to total stent struts per section demonstrated a marked increase in risk for LST as the number of uncovered struts increased. The odds ratio for thrombus in a stent with a ratio of uncovered to total stent struts per section >30% is 9.0 (95% CI, 3.5 to 22). The most powerful histological predictor of stent thrombosis was endothelial coverage. The best morphometric predictor of LST was the ratio of uncovered to total stent struts. Heterogeneity of healing is a common finding in drug-eluting stents with evidence of LST and demonstrates the importance of incomplete healing of the stented segment in the pathophysiology of LST.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Clin Med
                J Clin Med
                jcm
                Journal of Clinical Medicine
                MDPI
                2077-0383
                07 December 2019
                December 2019
                : 8
                : 12
                : 2167
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, Centre for Preclinical Research and Technology, Medical University of Warsaw, 02091 Warsaw, Poland; matjezewski@ 123456wp.pl (M.P.J.); kubisa.michal@ 123456gmail.com (M.J.K.); cereneyileten@ 123456gmail.com (C.E.); mpostula@ 123456wum.edu.pl (M.P.)
                [2 ]Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Division of Cardiology, “Magna Graecia” University, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy; saderosa@ 123456unicz.it (S.D.R.); indolfi@ 123456hotmail.com (C.I.)
                [3 ]Department of Cardiology, 5th Medical Department with Cardiology, Kaiser Franz Josef Hospital, 31100 Vienna, Austria; guenter.christ@ 123456wienkav.at
                [4 ]1st Department of Cardiology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 1061701 Poznań, Poland; maciej.lesiak@ 123456skpp.edu.pl
                [5 ]Department of Internal Medicine II, Division of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, 231090 Vienna, Austria; aurel.toma@ 123456meduniwien.ac.at
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: jolanta.siller-matula@ 123456meduniwien.ac.at ; Tel.: +43-140-4004-6140
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5388-942X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2630-5016
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2522-3887
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7826-4458
                Article
                jcm-08-02167
                10.3390/jcm8122167
                6947479
                31817876
                489a7700-ab37-4043-8998-9c0b0a4c5782
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 11 November 2019
                : 04 December 2019
                Categories
                Review

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

                Comments

                Comment on this article