Cargando…

Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision

BACKGROUND: To eliminate some of the potential late limitations of permanent metallic stents, the bioresorbable coronary stents or ‘bioresorbable vascular scaffolds’ (BVS) have been developed. METHODS: We reviewed all currently available clinical data on BVS implantation. RESULTS: Since the 2015 pos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Everaert, B., Wykrzykowska, J. J., Koolen, J., van der Harst, P., den Heijer, P., Henriques, J. P., van der Schaaf, R., de Smet, B., Hofma, S. H., Diletti, R., Weevers, A., Hoorntje, J., Smits, P., van Geuns, R. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5513994/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28643297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-017-1014-z
_version_ 1783250755674701824
author Everaert, B.
Wykrzykowska, J. J.
Koolen, J.
van der Harst, P.
den Heijer, P.
Henriques, J. P.
van der Schaaf, R.
de Smet, B.
Hofma, S. H.
Diletti, R.
Weevers, A.
Hoorntje, J.
Smits, P.
van Geuns, R. J.
author_facet Everaert, B.
Wykrzykowska, J. J.
Koolen, J.
van der Harst, P.
den Heijer, P.
Henriques, J. P.
van der Schaaf, R.
de Smet, B.
Hofma, S. H.
Diletti, R.
Weevers, A.
Hoorntje, J.
Smits, P.
van Geuns, R. J.
author_sort Everaert, B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To eliminate some of the potential late limitations of permanent metallic stents, the bioresorbable coronary stents or ‘bioresorbable vascular scaffolds’ (BVS) have been developed. METHODS: We reviewed all currently available clinical data on BVS implantation. RESULTS: Since the 2015 position statement on the appropriateness of BVS in percutaneous coronary interventions, several large randomised trials have been presented. These have demonstrated that achieving adequate 1 and 2 year outcomes with these first-generation BVS is not straightforward. These first adequately powered studies in non-complex lesions showed worse results if standard implantation techniques were used for these relatively thick scaffolds. Post-hoc analyses hypothesise that outcomes similar to current drug-eluting stents are still possible if aggressive lesion preparation, adequate sizing and high-pressure postdilatation are implemented rigorously. As long as this has not been confirmed in prospective studies the usage should be restricted to experienced centres with continuous outcome monitoring. For more complex lesions, results are even more disappointing and usage should be discouraged. When developed, newer generation scaffolds with thinner struts or faster resorption rates are expected to improve outcomes. In the meantime prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT, beyond one year) is recommended in an individualised approach for patients treated with current generation BVS. CONCLUSION: The new 2017 recommendations downgrade and limit the use of the current BVS to experienced centres within dedicated registries using the updated implantation protocol and advise the prolonged usage of DAPT. In line with these recommendations the manufacturer does not supply devices to the hospitals without such registries in place.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5513994
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55139942017-08-01 Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision Everaert, B. Wykrzykowska, J. J. Koolen, J. van der Harst, P. den Heijer, P. Henriques, J. P. van der Schaaf, R. de Smet, B. Hofma, S. H. Diletti, R. Weevers, A. Hoorntje, J. Smits, P. van Geuns, R. J. Neth Heart J Original Article BACKGROUND: To eliminate some of the potential late limitations of permanent metallic stents, the bioresorbable coronary stents or ‘bioresorbable vascular scaffolds’ (BVS) have been developed. METHODS: We reviewed all currently available clinical data on BVS implantation. RESULTS: Since the 2015 position statement on the appropriateness of BVS in percutaneous coronary interventions, several large randomised trials have been presented. These have demonstrated that achieving adequate 1 and 2 year outcomes with these first-generation BVS is not straightforward. These first adequately powered studies in non-complex lesions showed worse results if standard implantation techniques were used for these relatively thick scaffolds. Post-hoc analyses hypothesise that outcomes similar to current drug-eluting stents are still possible if aggressive lesion preparation, adequate sizing and high-pressure postdilatation are implemented rigorously. As long as this has not been confirmed in prospective studies the usage should be restricted to experienced centres with continuous outcome monitoring. For more complex lesions, results are even more disappointing and usage should be discouraged. When developed, newer generation scaffolds with thinner struts or faster resorption rates are expected to improve outcomes. In the meantime prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT, beyond one year) is recommended in an individualised approach for patients treated with current generation BVS. CONCLUSION: The new 2017 recommendations downgrade and limit the use of the current BVS to experienced centres within dedicated registries using the updated implantation protocol and advise the prolonged usage of DAPT. In line with these recommendations the manufacturer does not supply devices to the hospitals without such registries in place. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2017-06-22 2017-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5513994/ /pubmed/28643297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-017-1014-z Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Everaert, B.
Wykrzykowska, J. J.
Koolen, J.
van der Harst, P.
den Heijer, P.
Henriques, J. P.
van der Schaaf, R.
de Smet, B.
Hofma, S. H.
Diletti, R.
Weevers, A.
Hoorntje, J.
Smits, P.
van Geuns, R. J.
Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
title Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
title_full Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
title_fullStr Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
title_full_unstemmed Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
title_short Recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
title_sort recommendations for the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: 2017 revision
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5513994/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28643297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-017-1014-z
work_keys_str_mv AT everaertb recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT wykrzykowskajj recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT koolenj recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT vanderharstp recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT denheijerp recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT henriquesjp recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT vanderschaafr recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT desmetb recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT hofmash recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT dilettir recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT weeversa recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT hoorntjej recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT smitsp recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision
AT vangeunsrj recommendationsfortheuseofbioresorbablevascularscaffoldsinpercutaneouscoronaryinterventions2017revision