Key result
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds require an optimized implantation strategy to overcome limitations such as bulky struts and lower radial strength compared to metallic drug-eluting stents.
Provides tips and tricks for optimizing the implantation of current generation bioresorbable vascular scaffolds to minimize device failure.
Supports optimized implantation techniques for bioresorbable scaffolds; leaves open randomized confirmation of improved outcomes versus metallic stents.
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have become an attractive option in the field of percutaneous coronary intervention due to the complete resorption process that occurs over a few years. On the other hand, current generation devices have several limitations when compared to metallic drug-eluting stents including bulky struts and relatively less radial strength, and it has been indicated that an optimized implantation strategy is required. In this article, various tips and tricks to optimize implantation of current generation BVS are discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tanaka et al. (2016) conducted a review in percutaneous coronary intervention. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds vs. metallic drug-eluting stents was evaluated. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds require an optimized implantation strategy to overcome limitations such as bulky struts and lower radial strength compared to metallic drug-eluting stents.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: