Dataset Information

Mid-term outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds vs second-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Everolimus-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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

Five 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.

Conclusion

At 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.

SUBMITTER: Ke J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7478480 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mid-term outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds vs second-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ke Junsong J Zhang Hongyu H Huang Jun J Lv Ping P Yan Jumei J

Medicine 20200301 10

<h4>Background</h4>Everolimus-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 ...[more]

PMID: 32150103

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.

Dataset Information

Mid-term outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds vs second-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Mid-term outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds vs second-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets