Key result
Overlapping bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in STEMI patients achieved 100% procedural success, which was not significantly different from 96.4% with single scaffold implantation (p=0.5).
Why the study?
Immediate and midterm clinical outcomes following bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in STEMI patients were not well established.
Does bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation provide safe and effective immediate and midterm outcomes in patients with STEMI?
Cohort (n=74)
Yes
Does bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation provide safe and effective immediate and midterm outcomes in patients with STEMI?
BVS implantation in STEMI patients shows high procedural success and encouraging midterm outcomes, though larger randomized trials are needed.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BVS implantation feasible with high success and low 6-month events in STEMI; leaves open randomized comparisons versus metallic stents.
AIMS: In this multicentre prospective registry we sought to evaluate the immediate and midterm clinical outcomes following single or multiple overlapping bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation in the STEMI setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective cohort analysis was performed on all STEMI patients who underwent primary PCI with BVS implantation. Between December 2012 and February 2014, 1,232 STEMI patients underwent primary PCI at the participating centres. Of these, 74 (6.0%) received a BVS, 18 (24.3%) of them were multiple and overlapping. Procedural success was obtained in 72 (97.3%) cases without differences between the groups (overlapping BVS 100% vs. single BVS 96.4%, p=0.5). One patient experienced a reinfarction due to subacute BVS thrombosis which was successfully managed with balloon-only PCI while the other patient had a "slow-flow" phenomenon (final TIMI flow 2). At six-month follow-up, two non-fatal MI (2.7%), three target lesion revascularisations (4.1%), and one subacute BVS thrombosis were reported in three patients (one [5.6%] overlapping BVS and two [3.6%] in the single BVS group, p=0.5). All the events were successfully managed with re-PCI. CONCLUSIONS: BVS implantation in STEMI patients can be successfully performed with a high procedural success rate and encouraging midterm outcomes. Larger randomised trials and longer follow-up are needed to assess the potential clinical benefit of BVS versus new-generation DES in this setting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ielasi et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=74). Overlapping bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation vs. Single BVS implantation was evaluated on Procedural success (p=0.5). Overlapping bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in STEMI patients achieved 100% procedural success, which was not significantly different from 96.4% with single scaffold implantation (p=0.5).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: