+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Long-term outcomes after treatment of in-stent restenosis using the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold


      Read this article at

          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.



          Early studies evaluating the performance of bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) Absorb in in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions indicated promising short-term to mid-term outcomes.


          To evaluate long-term outcomes (up to 5 years) of patients with ISR treated with the Absorb BRS.


          We did an observational analysis of long-term outcomes of patients treated for ISR using the Absorb BRS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California, USA) between 2013 and 2016 at the Heart Centre Luzern. The main outcomes included a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE), defined as composite of cardiac death, target vessel (TV) myocardial infarction and TV revascularisation, target lesion revascularisation and scaffold thrombosis (ScT).


          Overall, 118 ISR lesions were treated using totally 131 BRS among 89 patients and 31 (35%) presented with an acute coronary syndrome. The median follow-up time was 66.3 (IQR 52.3–77) months. A DOCE had occurred in 17% at 1 year, 27% at 2 years and 40% at 5 years of all patients treated for ISR using Absorb. ScTs were observed in six (8.4%) of the cohort at 5 years.


          Treatment of ISR using the everolimus-eluting BRS Absorb resulted in high rates of DOCE at 5 years. Interestingly, while event rates were low in the first year, there was a massive increase of DOCE between 1 and 5 years after scaffold implantation. With respect to its complexity, involving also a more unpredictable vascular healing process, current and future BRS should be used very restrictively for the treatment of ISR.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

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

          Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.

          Although most clinical trials of coronary stents have measured nominally identical safety and effectiveness end points, differences in definitions and timing of assessment have created confusion in interpretation. The Academic Research Consortium is an informal collaboration between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe. Two meetings, in Washington, DC, in January 2006 and in Dublin, Ireland, in June 2006, sponsored by the Academic Research Consortium and including representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and all device manufacturers who were working with the Food and Drug Administration on drug-eluting stent clinical trial programs, were focused on consensus end point definitions for drug-eluting stent evaluations. The effort was pursued with the objective to establish consistency among end point definitions and provide consensus recommendations. On the basis of considerations from historical legacy to key pathophysiological mechanisms and relevance to clinical interpretability, criteria for assessment of death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis were developed. The broadly based consensus end point definitions in this document may be usefully applied or recognized for regulatory and clinical trial purposes. Although consensus criteria will inevitably include certain arbitrary features, consensus criteria for clinical end points provide consistency across studies that can facilitate the evaluation of safety and effectiveness of these devices.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization.

            The need for repeated treatment of restenosis of a treated vessel remains the main limitation of percutaneous coronary revascularization. Because sirolimus (rapamycin) inhibits the proliferation of lymphocytes and smooth-muscle cells, we compared a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard uncoated stent in patients with angina pectoris. We performed a randomized, double-blind trial to compare the two types of stents for revascularization of single, primary lesions in native coronary arteries. The trial included 238 patients at 19 medical centers. The primary end point was in-stent late luminal loss (the difference between the minimal luminal diameter immediately after the procedure and the diameter at six months). Secondary end points included the percentage of in-stent stenosis of the luminal diameter and the rate of restenosis (luminal narrowing of 50 percent or more). We also analyzed a composite clinical end point consisting of death, myocardial infarction, and percutaneous or surgical revascularization at 1, 6, and 12 months. At six months, the degree of neointimal proliferation, manifested as the mean (+/-SD) late luminal loss, was significantly lower in the sirolimus-stent group (-0.01+/-0.33 mm) than in the standard-stent group (0.80+/-0.53 mm, P<0.001). None of the patients in the sirolimus-stent group, as compared with 26.6 percent of those in the standard-stent group, had restenosis of 50 percent or more of the luminal diameter (P<0.001). There were no episodes of stent thrombosis. During a follow-up period of up to one year, the overall rate of major cardiac events was 5.8 percent in the sirolimus-stent group and 28.8 percent in the standard-stent group (P<0.001). The difference was due entirely to a higher rate of revascularization of the target vessel in the standard-stent group. As compared with a standard coronary stent, a sirolimus-eluting stent shows considerable promise for the prevention of neointimal proliferation, restenosis, and associated clinical events.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds for Coronary Artery Disease.

              In patients with coronary artery disease who receive metallic drug-eluting coronary stents, adverse events such as late target-lesion failure may be related in part to the persistent presence of the metallic stent frame in the coronary-vessel wall. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds have been developed to attempt to improve long-term outcomes.

                Author and article information

                Open Heart
                Open Heart
                Open Heart
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                13 September 2021
                : 8
                : 2
                [1]departmentDepartment of Cardiology , Luzerner Kantonsspital , Luzern, Switzerland
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Florim Cuculi; florim.cuculi@ 123456luks.ch

                MM and GMC are joint first authors.

                MB and FC are joint senior authors.

                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                Interventional Cardiology
                Original research
                Custom metadata

                cardiac catheterisation,coronary angiography,coronary artery disease,percutaneous coronary intervention


                Comment on this article