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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |