Dataset Information

Uptake of Drug-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Clinical Practice: An NCDR Registry to Practice Project.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Physicians have been criticized for having an overly enthusiastic response to new device approvals, especially for novel technologies. However, to our knowledge, the rates of new product adoption and patterns of new device usage in clinical practice have not been well described. Objective:To characterize the patterns of uptake of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) within the United States following device approval and to describe changes in response to subsequent releases of data and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warnings. Design, Setting, and Participants:This analysis of the uptake of BVS between January 2016 and June 2017 used CathPCI Registry data; all percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures with an implant of either a BVS or conventional stent were included. Data analysis was performed in October 2017. Exposures:Implant of BVS. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was monthly use of BVS in the United States. In addition, the characteristics of patients who received BVS and of hospitals that used BVS were assessed and comparisons of patient characteristics between BVS recipients and patients who were treated contemporaneously with metallic stents were made. Results:Of 682?951 procedures, 471?064 (69.0%) were done in men, 587?301 (86.0%) were among white people, and the mean (SD) age of those undergoing procedures with BVS vs conventional stents was 62.6 (11.4) years vs 65.7 (11.9) years. Of these, 4265 procedures (0.6%) used BVS overall (after FDA approval of BVS). Procedures with implants of BVS occurred among patients with fewer comorbidities and lower-acuity presentations compared with procedures with implants of conventional stents. The patient characteristics for BVS use were not dissimilar to the inclusion criteria of the ABSORB III FDA approval trial, with notable differences based on trial eligibility (eg, excluding patients with myocardial infarctions). The maximum monthly use of BVS was 1.25% of all PCI procedures that occurred 90 days after FDA approval, but with site-to-site variability. Declines in use were observed coincident with the scientific presentation of adverse event data as well as FDA warnings. Conclusions and Relevance:Most US physicians and hospitals were selective in their use of BVS, primarily using them in patients similar to those in the device's FDA approval trial. In addition, declines in use were evident in the subsequent month following the release of data that reported negative outcomes. These results illustrate an example of an appropriate physician response to adverse data updates and FDA warnings.

SUBMITTER: Chau KH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6506871 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) were designed to reduce the rate of late adverse events observed in conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) by dissolving once they have restored lasting patency.ObjectivesCompare the safety and efficacy of BVS versus DES in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery disease across a complete range of randomised controlled trial (RCT) follow-up intervals.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched from inception through 5 January 2022 for RCTs comparing the clinical outcomes of BVS versus DES. The primary safety outcome was stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST), and the primary efficacy outcome was target lesion failure (TLF: composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (ID-TLR)). Secondary outcomes were patient-oriented composite endpoint (combining all-death, all-MI and all-revascularisation), its individual components and those of TLF. Studies were appraised using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan V.5.4.Results11 919 patients were randomised to receive either BVS (n=6438) or DES (n=5481) across 17 trials (differing follow-up intervals from 3 months to 5 years). BVS demonstrated increased risk of ST across all timepoints (peaking at 2 years with risk ratio (RR): 3.47; 95% CI 1.80 to 6.70; p=0.0002). Similarly, they showed increased risk of TLF (peaking at 3 years, RR: 1.35; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.70; p=0.01) resulting from high rates of TVMI and ID-TLR. Though improvements were observed after device dissolution (5-year follow-up), these were non-significant. All other outcomes were statistically equivalent. Applicability to all BVS is limited by 91% of the BVS group receiving Abbott's Absorb.ConclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrates that current BVS are inferior to contemporary DES throughout the first 5 years at minimum.

Project description:ObjectiveRecanalization with balloon angioplasty and/or self-expanding stents (SES) has become the endovascular treatment of choice for symptomatic femoropopliteal occlusive disease. These strategies generate suboptimal clinical results, however, because they fail to expand the artery fully and ineffectively prevent recoil, neointimal hyperplasia, and restenosis. Balloon-expandable stents, given their greater radial force and rigid structure, represent a more effective treatment strategy, but only short lengths can be implanted safely in arteries that deform and bend with skeletal motion. The purpose of this preclinical experiment was to test the hypothesis that simultaneous implantation of a series of short, resorbable, balloon-expandable, paclitaxel-eluting scaffolds would prevent neointimal hyperplasia and stenosis compared with SES in an animal model of percutaneous femoropopliteal intervention.MethodsWe extruded 6 × 60 mm Efemoral Vascular Scaffold Systems (EVSS) from copolymers of poly-L-lactic acid, coated with paclitaxel 3 μg/mm2, crimped onto a single delivery balloon, and implanted percutaneously into the iliofemoral arteries of eight Yucatan mini-swine. We implanted 7- to 8-mm × 60 mm SES into the contralateral experimental arteries. The animals were serially imaged with contrast angiography and optical coherence tomography after 30, 90, 180, 365, and 730 days. The primary end point of this study was neointimal morphometry over time. Secondary end points included acute deformation and angiographic and optical coherence tomography-derived measurements of chronic vascular response.ResultsOver the 2-year study period, one SES was found to be completely occluded at 90 days; all EVSS were widely patent at all time points. Arteries treated with SES exhibited profound neointimal hyperplasia with in-stent stenosis. In contrast, arteries treated with EVSS exhibited only modest vascular responses and minimal stenosis. After 2 years, the mean neointimal thickness (0.45 ± 0.12 vs 1.31 ± 0.91 mm; P < .05) and area (8.41 ± 3.35 vs 21.86 ± 7.37 mm2; P < .05) were significantly decreased after EVSS implantation. By 2 years, all scaffolds in all EVSS-treated arteries had resorbed fully.ConclusionsIn this preclinical animal model of peripheral endovascular intervention, the EVSS decreased neointimal hyperplasia and stenosis significantly compared with SES, then dissolved completely between the first and second years after implantation.

Project description:BackgroundEverolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS), which have the characteristics of scaffold absorption and vascular function recovery, are the latest innovation in the treatment of coronary artery disease. This new concept has become a hot topic in the field of interventional cardiology. Data regarding mid-term clinical outcomes of BVS in acute coronary syndromes are currently scarce. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare mid-term outcome data for BVS and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and relevant web sites for studies with a follow-up of ? 1 years that studied percutaneous coronary interventions with BVS vs second-generation DES in acute coronary syndromes. A meta-analysis was performed with the software RevMan following the standards of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0.ResultsFive studies, 2 randomized controlled trials, and 3 observational studies, with a total of 1758 patients (BVS n?=?917; DES n?=?841) and a median follow-up duration of 24 months, were included. BVS, when compared with DES, resulted in higher rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.12-3.64; P?=?.02) and stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST/ScT) (OR?=?2.35, 95% CI: 1.13-4.89, P?=?.02). When TLR due to device thrombosis were excluded, the difference in risk estimates between the 2 groups was no longer significant (OR: 1.67, 95% CI: 0.73-3.82, P?=?.22). The risk for all-cause death (OR?=?1.32 95% CI: 0.61-2.88, P?=?.48), cardiac death (OR?=?1.29, 95% CI: 0.58-2.86 P?=?.52), target vessel myocardial infarction (OR?=?1.50, 95% CI: 0.86-2.61, P?=?.15), and target lesion failure (OR?=?1.34, 95% CI: 0.76-2.35, P?=?.31) did not differ between BVS and DES groups.ConclusionAt mid-term follow-up, BVS had a higher risk of TLR and ST/ScT than the second-generation DES in patients with acute coronary syndromes. ST/ScT was the key factor indicating the decreased safety and effectiveness of BVS relative to DES.

Dataset Information

Uptake of Drug-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Clinical Practice: An NCDR Registry to Practice Project.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets