Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Long-term outcome of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of RCTs.


ABSTRACT:

Background

Coronary bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were developed to overcome the limitations of standard metallic stents, especially to address late events after percutaneous coronary interventions. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BRS, compared with Everolimus-eluting stents (EES), using the data available from randomized trials, with a focus on long-term outcomes.

Methods

Published randomized trials comparing BRS to EES for the treatment of coronary artery disease were searched for within PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases up to April 4th 2017. The summary measure used was odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals.

Results

A total of 5 studies were eligible, including 5219 patients. At 2 years, BRS was associated with higher rates of target lesion failure (9.4% vs 7.2%; OR = 1.33; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.63; p = 0.008) and device thrombosis (2.3% vs 0.7%; OR = 3.22; 95% CI 1.86 to 5.57; p < 0.0001) compared with EES. The incidence of both early (within 30 days after implantation, 1.1% vs 0.5%, OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.02 to 3.81; p = 0.05) and very-late device thrombosis (>1 year, 0.6% vs 0.1%, OR 4.03, 95% CI 1.37 to 11.82; p = 0.01) was higher with BRS compared with EES.

Conclusions

BRS may be associated with worse two-years clinical outcomes compared with EES in patients with coronary artery disease.

SUBMITTER: Polimeni A 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5463321 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Long-term outcome of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of RCTs.

Polimeni Alberto A   Anadol Remzi R   Münzel Thomas T   Indolfi Ciro C   De Rosa Salvatore S   Gori Tommaso T  

BMC cardiovascular disorders 20170607 1


<h4>Background</h4>Coronary bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were developed to overcome the limitations of standard metallic stents, especially to address late events after percutaneous coronary interventions. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BRS, compared with Everolimus-eluting stents (EES), using the data available from randomized trials, with a focus on long-term outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>Published randomized trials comparing BRS to EES for the treatment o  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC5737153 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5513992 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6419823 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4845217 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC4355515 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7478480 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8976101 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5784929 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6816936 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4751731 | biostudies-literature