Dataset Information

Two year efficacy and safety of small versus large ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffolds of ?18 mm device length: A subgroup analysis of the German-Austrian ABSORB RegIstRy (GABI-R).

ABSTRACT: Aims:The ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold raised safety concerns due to higher rates of scaffold thrombosis (ScT) and adequate scaffold diameter and length for scaffold technology. Smaller scaffold diameter (SScD, 2.5 mm) was an infrequently quoted predictor of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Therefore, we evaluated the impact of SScD compared to large scaffold diameter (LScD, ?3 mm) of ?18 mm device length on 2 year outcome in the all-comer real life GABI-R cohort. Methods and Results:We compared patients with implanted LScD (1341 patients) vs. SScD (444 patients) of ?18 mm device length. Patients with LScD more often presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (35.8% vs. 20.6%, p < 0.0001) and single-vessel disease (50.6% vs. 36.5% p < 0.0001). After a 24 months follow-up, there was no difference in regard of MACE (9.66% vs. 12.31%, p = 0.14) or definite/probable ST (2.47% vs. 2.82%, p = 0.71). Despite no difference in target lesion revascularisations (TLR) (5.81% vs. 7.71%, p = 0.18), there was a higher need for target vessel revascularisation (TVR) in the SScD-group (11.57% vs. 7.51%, p < 0.05). Conclusion:Compared to LScD, SScD of ?18 mm device length demonstrated comparable safety in regard to MACE and ScT as well as efficacy in regard to TLR. Resorbable scaffold technology should not be restricted to large vessel diameters. Clinical Trial Registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02066623.

SUBMITTER: Zaczkiewicz M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7096743 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Two year efficacy and safety of small versus large ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffolds of ≤18 mm device length: A subgroup analysis of the German-Austrian ABSORB RegIstRy (GABI-R).

Zaczkiewicz Myron M Wein Bastian B Graf Matthias M Zimmermann Oliver O Kastner Johannes J Wöhrle Jochen J Thomas Riemer R Hamm Christian C Torzewski Jan J

International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature 20200320

<h4>Aims</h4>The ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold raised safety concerns due to higher rates of scaffold thrombosis (ScT) and adequate scaffold diameter and length for scaffold technology. Smaller scaffold diameter (SScD, 2.5 mm) was an infrequently quoted predictor of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Therefore, we evaluated the impact of SScD compared to large scaffold diameter (LScD, ≥3 mm) of ≤18 mm device length on 2 year outcome in the all-comer real life GABI-R cohort.<h4>Methods ...[more]

PMID: 32258361

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePhysicians 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.ObjectiveTo 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 participantsThis 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.ExposuresImplant of BVS.Main outcomes and measuresThe 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.ResultsOf 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 relevanceMost 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.

Project description:UNLABELLED:Innovations in drug-eluting stents (DES) have substantially reduced rates of in-segment restenosis and early stent thrombosis, improving clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However a fixed metallic implant in a vessel wall with restored patency and residual disease remains a precipitating factor for sustained local inflammation, in-stent neo-atherosclerosis and impaired vasomotor function increasing the risk for late complications attributed to late or very late stent thrombosis and late target lesion revascularization (TLR) (late catch-up). The quest for optimal coronary stenting continues by further innovations in stent design and by using biocompatible materials other than cobalt chromium, platinum chromium or stainless steel for engineering coronary implants. Bioresorbable scaffolds made of biodegradable polymers or biocorrodible metals with properties of transient vessel scaffolding, local drug-elution and future restoration of vessel anatomy, physiology and local hemodynamics have been recently developed. These devices have been utilized in selected clinical applications so far providing preliminary evidence of safety showing comparable performance with current generation drug-eluting stents (DES). Herein we provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of these technologies, we elaborate on the potential benefits of transient coronary scaffolds over permanent stents in the context of vascular reparation therapy, and we further focus on the evolving challenges these devices have to overcome to compete with current generation DES. CONDENSED ABSTRACT:: The quest for optimizing percutaneous coronary interventions continues by iterative innovations in device materials beyond cobalt chromium, platinum chromium or stainless steel for engineering coronary implants. Bioresorbable scaffolds made of biodegradable polymers or biocorrodible metals with properties of transient vessel scaffolding; local drug-elution and future restoration of vessel anatomy, physiology and local hemodynamics were recently developed. These devices have been utilized in selected clinical applications providing preliminary evidence of safety showing comparable intermediate term clinical outcomes with current generation drug-eluting stents.

Dataset Information

Two year efficacy and safety of small versus large ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffolds of ?18 mm device length: A subgroup analysis of the German-Austrian ABSORB RegIstRy (GABI-R).

Publications

Two year efficacy and safety of small versus large ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffolds of ≤18 mm device length: A subgroup analysis of the German-Austrian ABSORB RegIstRy (GABI-R).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets