Key result
ABSORB bioresorbable scaffolds in a growing porcine model showed greater recoil at 1 month (lumen area change -41.4% vs -20.9%) but demonstrated adaptability to vessel growth at 12 months.
Why the study?
Little was known about serial changes in lumen and device dimensions following bioresorbable scaffold implantation in a growing animal model.
Does bioresorbable scaffold implantation compared to bare metal stents adapt to vessel growth in a growing porcine model?
Does bioresorbable scaffold implantation compared to bare metal stents adapt to vessel growth in a growing porcine model?
In a growing porcine model, bioresorbable scaffolds demonstrated substantial adaptability to vessel growth in the late phase compared to bare metal stents.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Should not yet inform pediatric scaffold use; leaves open translation of vessel growth adaptation to humans.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about serial changes in lumen and device dimensions after bioresorbable scaffold implantation in a growing animal model. METHODS AND RESULTS: ABSORB (n=14) or bare metal stents (ICROS amg [Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA], Winsen-Luhe, Germany; n=15) were implanted in the coronary arteries of domestic swine (a hybrid of Finnish-Norwegian Landrace swine) weighing 30-35 kg. Angiography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed immediately after implantation and repeated at 7 days, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the index procedure. One month after implantation, mean lumen area decreased relative to baseline in both groups (relative area change from baseline, -41.4±15.6% for ABSORB vs. -20.9±18.6% for ICROS) while mean device area decreased only in the ABSORB group (relative area change: -11.1±9.4% vs. +0.14±7.95%, respectively). At 12 months, mean lumen area increased relative to baseline in both groups (relative area change from baseline, +55.6±22.4% vs. +32.3±83.6%, respectively) in accordance with the swine growth weighing up to 260-300 kg. Mean device area in the ICROS group remained stable whereas that in the ABSORB group began to increase between 3 and 6 months along with the vessel growth (relative area change: +107.8±25.7% vs. +0.14±7.95%). CONCLUSIONS: In the growing porcine model, ABSORB was associated with greater extent of recoil 1 month after implantation compared with ICROS but demonstrated substantial adaptability to vessel growth in late phase.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Asano et al. (2019) studied Coronary artery stenting (growing porcine model) (n=29). ABSORB bioresorbable scaffold vs. ICROS bare metal stent was evaluated on Relative area change from baseline in mean lumen area at 1 month. ABSORB bioresorbable scaffolds in a growing porcine model showed greater recoil at 1 month (lumen area change -41.4% vs -20.9%) but demonstrated adaptability to vessel growth at 12 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: