Dataset Information

Five-year angiographic, OCT and clinical outcomes of a randomized comparison of everolimus and biolimus-eluting coronary stents with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To compare 5-year angiographic, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and clinical outcomes between patients treated with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) and drug-eluting stents (DES).

Methods

The EverBio-2 trial (Comparison of Everolimus- and Biolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold) was a single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial in which 240 patients were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to BVS, everolimus-eluting (EES) or biolimus-eluting (BES) DES. Clinical follow-up was scheduled up to 5 years. All patients, alive and who did not have repeat revascularization of the target lesion during follow-up were asked to return for angiographic follow-up at 5 years.

Results

Five-year angiographic follow-up was completed in 122 patients (51%) and OCT analysis was performed in 86 (36%) patients. In-stent late lumen loss was similar in both groups with 0.50 ± 0.38 mm in BVS versus 0.58 ± 0.36 mm in EES/BES, p = 0.20. Clinical follow-up was complete in 232 patients (97%) at 5 years. The rate of the device-oriented endpoint was 22% in the BVS and 18% in the EES/BES group (p = 0.49). The patient-oriented composite endpoint occurred in 40% of BVS- and 43% of EES/BES-treated patients (p = 0.72) at 5 years. No acute coronary syndrome due to stent thrombosis was detected after 2 years. Complete BVS strut resorption was observed at 5 years in the OCT subgroup.

Conclusion

Five-year clinical outcomes were similar between BVS and DES patients as well as angiographic outcomes in a selected subgroup. However, a definitive conclusion cannot be drawn because the EverBio-2 trial was not powered for clinical and angiographic endpoints at 5 years of follow-up.

SUBMITTER: Schukraft S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9544452 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Five-year angiographic, OCT and clinical outcomes of a randomized comparison of everolimus and biolimus-eluting coronary stents with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds.

Schukraft Sara S Arroyo Diego D Togni Mario M Goy Jean-Jacques JJ Wenaweser Peter P Stadelmann Mathieu M Baeriswyl Gerard G Muller Olivier O Stauffer Jean-Christophe JC Puricel Serban S Cook Stéphane S

Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions 20210626 3

<h4>Aims</h4>To compare 5-year angiographic, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and clinical outcomes between patients treated with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) and drug-eluting stents (DES).<h4>Methods</h4>The EverBio-2 trial (Comparison of Everolimus- and Biolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold) was a single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial in which 240 patients were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to BVS, everolimus-e ...[more]

PMID: 34173699

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAbsorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS)-related events have been reported between 1 and 3 years - the period of active scaffold bioresorption. Data on the performance of the Absorb BVS in daily clinical practice beyond this time point are scarce.AimsThis report aimed to provide the final five-year clinical follow-up of the Absorb BVS in comparison with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES). In addition, we evaluated the effect of prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) administration on events in the scaffold group.MethodsAIDA was a multicentre, investigator-initiated, non-inferiority trial, in which 1,845 unselected patients with coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to either the Absorb BVS (n=924) or the XIENCE EES (n=921). Target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularisation, was the primary endpoint. Scaffold thrombosis cases were matched with controls and tested for the effect of prolonged DAPT.ResultsUp to five-year follow-up, there was no difference in TVF between the Absorb BVS (17.7%) and the XIENCE EES (16.1%) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-1.41; p=0.302). Definite or probable device thrombosis (DT) occurred in 43 patients (4.8%) in the scaffold group compared to 13 patients (1.5%) in the stent group (HR 3.32, 95% CI: 1.78-6.17; p<0.001). DT between 3 and 4 years occurred six times in the Absorb arm versus three times in the XIENCE arm. Between 4 and 5 years, the incidence was three versus two, respectively. Of those three DT in the scaffold group, two occurred in XIENCE EES-treated lesions. The odds ratio of scaffold thrombosis in patients on DAPT compared to off DAPT throughout five-year follow-up was 0.36 (95% CI: 0.15-0.86).ConclusionsThe excess risk of the Absorb BVS on late adverse events, in particular device thrombosis, in routine PCI continues up to 4 years and seems to plateau afterwards. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01858077.

Project description:BackgroundBioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) were designed to reduce the rate of late adverse events observed in conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) by dissolving once they have restored lasting patency.ObjectivesCompare the safety and efficacy of BVS versus DES in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery disease across a complete range of randomised controlled trial (RCT) follow-up intervals.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched from inception through 5 January 2022 for RCTs comparing the clinical outcomes of BVS versus DES. The primary safety outcome was stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST), and the primary efficacy outcome was target lesion failure (TLF: composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (ID-TLR)). Secondary outcomes were patient-oriented composite endpoint (combining all-death, all-MI and all-revascularisation), its individual components and those of TLF. Studies were appraised using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan V.5.4.Results11 919 patients were randomised to receive either BVS (n=6438) or DES (n=5481) across 17 trials (differing follow-up intervals from 3 months to 5 years). BVS demonstrated increased risk of ST across all timepoints (peaking at 2 years with risk ratio (RR): 3.47; 95% CI 1.80 to 6.70; p=0.0002). Similarly, they showed increased risk of TLF (peaking at 3 years, RR: 1.35; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.70; p=0.01) resulting from high rates of TVMI and ID-TLR. Though improvements were observed after device dissolution (5-year follow-up), these were non-significant. All other outcomes were statistically equivalent. Applicability to all BVS is limited by 91% of the BVS group receiving Abbott's Absorb.ConclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrates that current BVS are inferior to contemporary DES throughout the first 5 years at minimum.

Dataset Information

Five-year angiographic, OCT and clinical outcomes of a randomized comparison of everolimus and biolimus-eluting coronary stents with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Five-year angiographic, OCT and clinical outcomes of a randomized comparison of everolimus and biolimus-eluting coronary stents with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets