A novel approach to treat in-stent restenosis: 6- and 12-month results using the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold

Jamshidi, Peiman; Nyffenegger, Tobias; Sabti, Zaid; Buset, Elefteri M.; Toggweiler, Stefan; Kobza, Richard; Cuculi, Florim

doi:10.4244/eijv11i13a287

Cited by 29 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This retrospective study, although with a small number of patients, is the first to report long‐term (>24 months) clinical outcomes follow‐up of BVS implantation for the treatment of ISR. Our results are in line with the few small registries already published which reported 6, 12, and up to 15 months follow‐up . Recently, Moscarella et al reported the largest prospective series on BVS implantation as therapy for ISR, which enrolled 116 patients (127 lesions) with either BMS or DES ISR.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…In this multicenter analysis, the primary end‐point, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia‐driven TLR was 9.1% at 15 months. Consistent with these results, Jamshidi et al reported a 12.2% TLR rate at 12 month follow‐up for patients treated for either BMS or DES ISR. Our TLR‐rate (16.2%) is higher than reported in these two recent studies.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…Recent case reports and small series have suggested that the implantation of BVS to treat ISR might have positive effects on neoatherosclerosis and could avoid the addition of multiple metal layers. The largest and most recent studies of such strategy reported acceptable target lesion failure rates at 6–15 months . In this report, we describe our initial experience of BVS use to treat ISR in a consecutive population of all‐comers and report its long‐term outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold to treat in‐stent restenosis: Single‐center experience

Picard

Avram

Marquis‐Gravel

et al. 2017

J Interven Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold to treat in‐stent restenosis: Single‐center experience

Picard

Avram

Marquis‐Gravel

et al. 2017

J Interven Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some scientific reports however, focus on dedicating interventional techniques to minimize these risks [10,11]. ISR is also a challenging scenario for BRS, because the expansion of the scaffold is sensibly inferior than in on-label indications [12] and reported clinical outcomes are inconsistent to date [13,14]. The current case reports the successful treatment of a lesion combining both bifurcation and ISR challenges, by implanting a BRS.…”

Section: This Paper Was Guest Edited By Prof Marek Kozińskimentioning

confidence: 96%

Challenging treatment of in-stent restenosis in a coronary bifurcation by implantation of a bioresorbable scaffold under optical coherence tomography guidance

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 67-year-old male patient with stable angina, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia who underwent bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in the distal right coronary artery (RCA) (Azule 3 × 9 mm) and everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation in the first diagonal branch (D1) (Xience 2.25 × 18 mm) and in the proximal circumflex branch (LCx) (Xience 3 × 28 mm). One year subsequent to the precedure the patient was readmitted for relapse of the angina Canadian Cardiovascular Society scale II, exhibiting a positive exercise test. The coronary angiography showed a distal-edge in-stent restenosis (ISR) in the distal RCA, extending to the posterior descending artery (PDA), Medina 110 bifurcation ( Fig. 1A). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) showed predominantly fibrolipidic restenotic tissue, with minimal lumen area (MLA) 1.95 mm 2 , minimal lumen diameter (MLD) 1.57 mm, proximal reference vessel diameter (RVD) 3.1 mm, distal RVD 2.75 mm and lesion length 21.2 mm (Fig. 1B, C).Optical coherence tomography-guided implantation of a bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) to treat the bifurcation ISR was performed through a radial approach, using a 6 french guiding-catheter. Guidewires were placed in the PDA and in the posterolateral artery (PLA), in order to protect the side branch in case of an eventual occlusion. Predilation 1:1 with a non-compliant (NC) balloon 3.0 × 18 mm (16 atm) was performed until the balloon was completely expanded in angiography. A second OCT run verified fragmentation of restenotic tissue and sufficient luminal gain to ensure adequate scaffold expansion. A poly-lactide BRS (ABSORB 3 × 28 mm) was then slowly deployed at 12 atm, holding pressure for 60 s. Proximaloptimalization-technique with an NC-balloon 3.25 × 15 mm (16 atm) was then performed by placing the proximal edge of the distal marker of the balloon at the carina of the PDA-PLA bifurcation, with an optimal angiographic result ( Fig. 1D). A final OCT pullback showed optimal apposition and expansion (MLA 5.3 mm 2 /MLD 2.6 mm; Fig. 1E), structural integrity of the device and clear access to the PLA side branch through the scaffold struts (Fig. 1F). Three-month follow-up documented an optimal clinical and angiographical result (Suppl. Video 1).Poly-lactide BRS are supposed to resorb completely [1-5], depending on the specific device and on patient/local conditions. The resorption restores vasomotion and eventually normal endothelial

show abstract

“…Hence, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Circulatory System Device Panel members reviewed the outcomes of the trial A Clinical Evaluation of Absorb BVS, the Everolimus Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold in the Treatment of Subjects with de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (ABSORB III) and additional post hoc analyses presented by the sponsor and the FDA [3,4]. The FDA advisory panel of experts recommended approval of BVS based on the analysis of its risks and rewards in July 2016 [5].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus metallic stent in percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the AIDA trial

Shah

Fatima

Dharani

et al. 2017

Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drug-eluting stents have significantly improved the long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by decreasing the excessive growth of neointima. However, conventional stents have some limitations. PCI with a bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) has emerged as an alternative since the presence of the prosthesis in the coronary artery is transient. A US Food and Drug Administration advisory panel of experts recommended approval of BVS based on the analysis of its risks and rewards in July 2016. In June 2017, the preliminary results of the Amsterdam Investigator-initiateD Absorb Strategy All-comers (AIDA) trial were released. This randomized controlled trial compared an everolimus-eluting BVS with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent in the context of routine clinical practice. The preliminary results revealed no significant difference in target-vessel failure when BVS was compared with metallic stenting. However, during the 2 years of follow-up, BVS was associated with a higher rate of device thrombosis. This is seen as an important development in the trial. There are some concerns regarding stent thrombosis and the restoration of real vessel functionality in the long term. For these reasons, for now, metallic stents remain the treatment of choice for PCI.

show abstract

A novel approach to treat in-stent restenosis: 6- and 12-month results using the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold

Cited by 29 publications

References 25 publications

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold to treat in‐stent restenosis: Single‐center experience

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold to treat in‐stent restenosis: Single‐center experience

Challenging treatment of in-stent restenosis in a coronary bifurcation by implantation of a bioresorbable scaffold under optical coherence tomography guidance

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus metallic stent in percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the AIDA trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About