Very Late Thrombosis: Bioresorbable Scaffolds vs. Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Drug-Eluting Stents

Very Late Thrombosis: Bioresorbable Scaffolds vs. Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Drug-Eluting StentsThis study sought to compare the 2-year outcomes between bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) and everolimus-eluting metallic drug-eluting stents (EES), since the occurrence of very late thrombosis (thrombosis beyond 1 year after implantation) is an increasing concern in relation to new devices.

 

This meta-analysis was conducted based on 24 studies (BVS: n = 2567 and EES: n = 19,806) reporting the 2-year outcomes of both devices to compare the risk of thrombosis and target lesion failure in 7 comparative studies (3 randomized and 4 observational). Seventeen additional single-arm studies were used to estimate the incidence rates of these events.

 

In the 7 comparative studies, the risk for very late thrombosis between 1 and 2 years was numerically higher in BVS than in EES (odds ratio [OR]: 2.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62 to 6.71).

 

The excess risk of thrombosis for BVS compared to EES at 2 years was significant (OR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.02 to 4.26) as opposed to target lesion failure, which turned out to be very similar for both devices.

 

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis, bioresorbable scaffolds were associated with higher risk for very late thrombosis and global thrombosis at 2 years when compared with everolimus-eluting metallic drug-eluting stents.

 

Editorial

A previous meta-analysis carried out by Dr. Salvatore Cassese and his team published in The Lancet in 2015 showed higher rates of thrombosis (0.5 vs. 1.3%) and luminal loss for the BVS group. This new study ratifies that which had already been published. BVS theoretical advantages were expected to emerge many years after placement. However, these devices have not shown any superiority over drug-eluting stents, so far.

 

Original title: Very Late Scaffold Thrombosis of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold. Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis.

Reference: Toshiaki Toyota et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2017;10:27–37.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

Patients at High Risk of Bleeding After Coronary Angioplasty: Are Risk Assessment Tools ARC-HBR and PRECISE-DAPT Useful?

Patients undergoing coronary stenting typically receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 6 to 12 months, consisting of a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor and aspirin. While DAPT...

ACC 2025 | WARRIOR: Ischemia in Women with Non-Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

Approximately half of all women with symptomatic ischemia who undergo coronary angiography are found to have non-obstructive coronary artery disease ((ischemia and non-obstructive coronary...

ACC 2025 | FLAVOUR II: Angiography-Derived FFR-Guided vs. IVUS-Guided PCI

Physiological assessment is effective when it comes to decision-making for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, despite the available evidence, its use remains limited. AngioFFR...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

RACE Trial: Effect of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty and Riociguat on Right Ventricular Afterload and Function in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension

Even though pulmonary endarterectomy is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), up to 40% of patients are not candidates because...

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

TAVR in Small Annuli: What Valve Should We Use?

One of the major challenges of severe aortic stenosis are patients with small aortic annuli, defined as ≤430 mm² aortic valve area. This condition...