BIOSCIENCE study: Absorbable polymer versus permanent in sirolimus-eluting stents

This multicenter study randomized 1063 patients to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent with absorbable polymer and 1056 patients to permanent polymer stent. No differences in stent thrombosis (3.4% in the group with permanent polymer versus 2.8% in the group with absorbable polymer), target vessel revascularization (6.7% for both) or mortality (2.1% versus 2.9%; p = 0.7). The absorbable polymer stent was non-inferior to permanent polymer stent. 

1_thomas_pilgrim
Thomas Pilgrim
2014-09-01

Original title: Randomized comparison of a novel, ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularization. BIOSCIENCE study.

More articles by this author

NONI: Inhaled nitric oxide to reduce reperfusion injury in myocardial infarction

Infarct size is an independent predictor of survival and ventricular function. Several alternatives have been tried to reduce the size of the infarcted area...

ATLANTIC: administration of ticagrelor in the ambulance versus in the cath lab

The platelet P2Y12 receptor antagonist ticagrelor is shown to reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events when administered in hospital admission to patients suffering an...

MITOCARE: TRO40303 intravenous infusion in the context of primary angioplasty

Prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study evaluated intravenous infusion of TRO40303 versus placebo administered immediately before balloon dilation of the culprit artery during primary angioplasty....

FAMOUS NSTEMI: FFR versus Angiography in non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction

The benefit of myocardial revascularization (angioplasty or surgery) guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) in the context of acute coronary syndromes is poorly studied...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

ACC 2026 | ALL-RISE Trial: Coronary Physiological Assessment Using FFRangio

Coronary physiological assessment using pressure-wire techniques (FFR/iFR) carries a Class IA recommendation in ACC/AHA guidelines; however, its use remains limited due to factors such...

ACC 2026 | Protect The Head-To-Head Trial: Randomized Comparison Between Emboliner and Sentinel During TAVI

Ischemic stroke remains one of the most feared complications of TAVI, with a relatively low but persistent incidence of 2–4%, without significant reduction over...

ACC 2026 | PRO-TAVI Trial: Deferring Coronary Angioplasty in Patients Undergoing TAVI

Coronary artery disease is common in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI. Current guidelines recommend considering revascularization in significant coronary lesions, particularly in...