Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Netherlands Heart Journal 11/2017

Open Access 01-11-2017 | Original Article - E‑Learning

Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold in daily clinical practice: A single-centre experience

Authors: W. S. Remkes, R. S. Hermanides, M. W. Kennedy, E. Fabris, E. Kaplan, J. P. Ottervanger, A. W. J. van ’t Hof, E. Kedhi

Published in: Netherlands Heart Journal | Issue 11/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Recent evidence has raised concerns regarding the safety of the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (E-BVS) (Absorb, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Following these data, the use of this device has diminished in the Netherlands; however, daily practice data are limited. Therefore we studied the incidence of safety and efficacy outcomes with this device in daily clinical practice in a single large tertiary centre in the Netherlands.

Methods

All E‑BVS treated patients were included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel non-fatal myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and clinically-driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR). The secondary endpoint was the incidence of definite scaffold thrombosis.

Results

Between October 2013 and January 2017, 105 patients were treated with 147 E‑BVS. This population contained 42 (40%) patients with diabetes mellitus and 43 (40.9%) undergoing treatment for acute coronary syndrome, and thus represents a high-risk patient cohort. Mean follow-up was 19.8 months. Intravascular imaging guidance during scaffold implantation was used in 64/105 (43.5%) patients. The primary endpoint (TLF) occurred in 3 (2.9%) patients. All-cause mortality and cardiac mortality occurred in 2 (2%) and 0 (0%) patients respectively. TV-MI occurred in 2 patients (1.9%): both were periprocedural and not related to the BVS implantation. TLR occurred in 1 patient (1.0%) during follow-up. No definite scaffold thrombosis occurred during follow-up.

Conclusion

This single-centre study examining the real-world experience of E‑BVS implantation in a high-risk population shows excellent procedural safety and long-term clinical outcomes.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Sotomi Y, et al. Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, single-blind, multicentre clinical trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2479–91.CrossRefPubMed Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Sotomi Y, et al. Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, single-blind, multicentre clinical trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2479–91.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ellis SG, Kereiakes DJ, Metzger DC, et al. Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds for Coronary Artery Disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1905–1905.CrossRefPubMed Ellis SG, Kereiakes DJ, Metzger DC, et al. Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds for Coronary Artery Disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1905–1905.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Gao R, Yang Y, Han Y, et al. Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Versus Metallic Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2298–309.CrossRefPubMed Gao R, Yang Y, Han Y, et al. Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Versus Metallic Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2298–309.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Onuma Y, Sotomi Y, Shiomi H, et al. Two-year clinical, angiographic, and serial optical coherence tomographic follow-up after implantation of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold and an everolimus-eluting metallic stent: insights from the randomised ABSORB Japan trial. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:1090–101.CrossRefPubMed Onuma Y, Sotomi Y, Shiomi H, et al. Two-year clinical, angiographic, and serial optical coherence tomographic follow-up after implantation of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold and an everolimus-eluting metallic stent: insights from the randomised ABSORB Japan trial. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:1090–101.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Dudek D, et al. A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1‑year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:43–54.CrossRefPubMed Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Dudek D, et al. A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1‑year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:43–54.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Kimura T, Kozuma K, Tanabe K, et al. A randomized trial evaluating everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable scaffolds vs. everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients with coronary artery disease: ABSORB Japan. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:3332–42.CrossRefPubMed Kimura T, Kozuma K, Tanabe K, et al. A randomized trial evaluating everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable scaffolds vs. everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients with coronary artery disease: ABSORB Japan. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:3332–42.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Tanaka A, Latib A, Kawamoto H, et al. Clinical outcomes of a real world cohort following bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation utilizing an optimized implantation strategy. EuroIntervention. 2017;12(14):1730–1737. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-16-00247 Tanaka A, Latib A, Kawamoto H, et al. Clinical outcomes of a real world cohort following bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation utilizing an optimized implantation strategy. EuroIntervention. 2017;12(14):1730–1737. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4244/​EIJ-D-16-00247
11.
go back to reference Brugaletta S, Gori T, Low AF, et al. Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: 1‑Year Results of a Propensity Score Matching Comparison: The BVS-EXAMINATION Study (Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold-A Clinical. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:189–97.CrossRefPubMed Brugaletta S, Gori T, Low AF, et al. Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: 1‑Year Results of a Propensity Score Matching Comparison: The BVS-EXAMINATION Study (Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold-A Clinical. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:189–97.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Puricel S, Arroyo D, Corpataux N, et al. Comparison of Everolimus- and Biolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:791–801.CrossRefPubMed Puricel S, Arroyo D, Corpataux N, et al. Comparison of Everolimus- and Biolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:791–801.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Costopoulos C, Latib A, Naganuma T, et al. Comparison of early clinical outcomes between ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold and everolimus-eluting stent implantation in a real-world population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:E10–E5.CrossRefPubMed Costopoulos C, Latib A, Naganuma T, et al. Comparison of early clinical outcomes between ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold and everolimus-eluting stent implantation in a real-world population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:E10–E5.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Oberhauser JP, Hossainy S, Rapoza RJ. Design principles and performance of bioresorbable polymeric vascular scaffolds. EuroIntervention. 2009;5(Suppl F):F15–22.CrossRefPubMed Oberhauser JP, Hossainy S, Rapoza RJ. Design principles and performance of bioresorbable polymeric vascular scaffolds. EuroIntervention. 2009;5(Suppl F):F15–22.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Third Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1581–98.CrossRefPubMed Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Third Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1581–98.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R, et al. Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions. Circulation. 2007;115:2344–51.CrossRefPubMed Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R, et al. Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions. Circulation. 2007;115:2344–51.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Lipinski MJ, Escarcega RO, Baker NC, et al. Scaffold Thrombosis after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with ABSORB Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:12–24.CrossRefPubMed Lipinski MJ, Escarcega RO, Baker NC, et al. Scaffold Thrombosis after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with ABSORB Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:12–24.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Sotomi Y, Suwannasom P, Serruys P, et al. Possible mechanical causes of scaffold thrombosis: insights from case reports with intracoronary imaging. EuroIntervention. 2017;12:1747–56.CrossRefPubMed Sotomi Y, Suwannasom P, Serruys P, et al. Possible mechanical causes of scaffold thrombosis: insights from case reports with intracoronary imaging. EuroIntervention. 2017;12:1747–56.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Timmers L, Stella PR, Agostoni P. Very late bioresorbable vascular scaffold thrombosis following discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:393.CrossRefPubMed Timmers L, Stella PR, Agostoni P. Very late bioresorbable vascular scaffold thrombosis following discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:393.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Karanasos A, Van Mieghem N, van Ditzhuijzen N, et al. Angiographic and Optical Coherence Tomography Insights Into Bioresorbable Scaffold Thrombosis: Single-Center Experience. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:e2369–e2369.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Karanasos A, Van Mieghem N, van Ditzhuijzen N, et al. Angiographic and Optical Coherence Tomography Insights Into Bioresorbable Scaffold Thrombosis: Single-Center Experience. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:e2369–e2369.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Ormiston JA, Webber B, Ubod B, et al. An independent bench comparison of two bioresorbable drug-eluting coronary scaffolds (Absorb and DESolve) with a durable metallic drug-eluting stent (ML8/Xpedition). EuroIntervention. 2015;11:60–7.CrossRefPubMed Ormiston JA, Webber B, Ubod B, et al. An independent bench comparison of two bioresorbable drug-eluting coronary scaffolds (Absorb and DESolve) with a durable metallic drug-eluting stent (ML8/Xpedition). EuroIntervention. 2015;11:60–7.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Danzi GB, Sesana M, Arieti M, et al. Does optimal lesion preparation reduce the amount of acute recoil of the absorbe BVS? Insights from a real-world population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:984–981.CrossRefPubMed Danzi GB, Sesana M, Arieti M, et al. Does optimal lesion preparation reduce the amount of acute recoil of the absorbe BVS? Insights from a real-world population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:984–981.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Foin N, Gutierrez-Chico JL, Nakatani S, et al. Incomplete Stent Apposition Causes High Shear Flow Disturbances and Delay in Neointimal Coverage as a Function of Strut to Wall Detachment Distance: Implications for the Management of Incomplete Stent Apposition. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:180–9.CrossRefPubMed Foin N, Gutierrez-Chico JL, Nakatani S, et al. Incomplete Stent Apposition Causes High Shear Flow Disturbances and Delay in Neointimal Coverage as a Function of Strut to Wall Detachment Distance: Implications for the Management of Incomplete Stent Apposition. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:180–9.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Puricel S, Cuculi F, Weissner M, et al. Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold Thrombosis: Multicenter Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Presentation, Mechanisms, and Predictors. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:921–31.CrossRefPubMed Puricel S, Cuculi F, Weissner M, et al. Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold Thrombosis: Multicenter Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Presentation, Mechanisms, and Predictors. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:921–31.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Ishibashi Y, Onuma Y, Muramatsu T, et al. Lessons learned from acute and late scaffold failures in the ABSORB EXTEND trial. EuroIntervention. 2014;10:449–57.CrossRefPubMed Ishibashi Y, Onuma Y, Muramatsu T, et al. Lessons learned from acute and late scaffold failures in the ABSORB EXTEND trial. EuroIntervention. 2014;10:449–57.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Fabris E, Caiazzo G, Kilic ID, et al. Is high pressure postdilation safe in bioresorbable vascular scaffolds? Optical coherence tomography observations after noncompliant balloons inflated at more than 24 atmospheres. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87:839–46.CrossRefPubMed Fabris E, Caiazzo G, Kilic ID, et al. Is high pressure postdilation safe in bioresorbable vascular scaffolds? Optical coherence tomography observations after noncompliant balloons inflated at more than 24 atmospheres. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87:839–46.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Caiazzo G, Kilic ID, Fabris E, et al. Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold: What have we learned after 5 years of clinical experience? Int J Cardiol. 2015;201:129–36.CrossRefPubMed Caiazzo G, Kilic ID, Fabris E, et al. Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold: What have we learned after 5 years of clinical experience? Int J Cardiol. 2015;201:129–36.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Tamburino C, Latib A, van Geuns RJ, et al. Contemporary practice and technical aspects in coronary intervention with bioresorbable scaffolds: a European perspective. EuroIntervention. 2015;11:45–52.CrossRefPubMed Tamburino C, Latib A, van Geuns RJ, et al. Contemporary practice and technical aspects in coronary intervention with bioresorbable scaffolds: a European perspective. EuroIntervention. 2015;11:45–52.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold in daily clinical practice: A single-centre experience
Authors
W. S. Remkes
R. S. Hermanides
M. W. Kennedy
E. Fabris
E. Kaplan
J. P. Ottervanger
A. W. J. van ’t Hof
E. Kedhi
Publication date
01-11-2017
Publisher
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Published in
Netherlands Heart Journal / Issue 11/2017
Print ISSN: 1568-5888
Electronic ISSN: 1876-6250
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-017-1038-4

Other articles of this Issue 11/2017

Netherlands Heart Journal 11/2017 Go to the issue