Why the study?
Do everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds provide acceptable rates of target lesion failure and scaffold thrombosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in routine clinical practice?
Do everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds provide acceptable rates of target lesion failure and scaffold thrombosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in routine clinical practice?
While everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds showed acceptable target lesion failure rates at 6 months in a real-world European registry, the non-negligible rate of early scaffold thrombosis raises safety concerns.
May warrant caution with early BVS thrombosis in routine PCI; leaves open need for optimized protocols in prospective trials.
"Real-world" outcomes of BVS showed acceptable rates of TLF at six months, although the rates of early and midterm scaffold thrombosis, mostly clustered within 30 days, were not negligible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Capodanno et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: