Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in acute coronary syndromes: clinical evidence, tips and tricks

Long-term clinical results of biodegradable vascular scaffold ABSORB BVS™ using the PSP-technique in patients with acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

The PSP (predilatation, sizing, post-dilatation)-technique was developed to improve the prognosis of patients after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. In acute coronary syndrome (ACS) the use of BVS is particularly demanding and carries some potential risk regarding aggressive lesion preparation, proper vessel sizing due to spasm and thrombus inside the artery. The aim herein, was to determine the long-term results of BVS stenting in ACS patients depending on the scaffold implantation technique.

METHODS

The present study is a prospective, two-center study, which consisted of 182 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with BVS (Absorb, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California, USA) implantation for the ACS. All patients were divided into two groups. The first consisted of 52 patients treated with the PSP-technique (PSP group). The second group enrolled 130 patients treated with a non-PSP procedure (non-PSP group).

RESULTS

The procedure was successful in all patients. The mean observation time was 28.8 ± 16.5 months (median 28.3 months, interquartile range 24.0 [17.0-41.0] months). It was found that target vessel failure (TVF) was consistently reduced in patients using the PSP-technique as compared with the non-PSP group (5.8% vs. 17.7%, p = 0.03). Moreover, PSP-technique was superior to non-PSP-technique concerning major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (3.7% vs. 22.3%, p = 0.02). Logistic regression analysis revealed that the use of PSP technique significantly decreased the risk of target vessel revascularization (odds ratio [OR] 0.11, p = 0.01), TVF (OR 0.28, p = 0.03) and MACE (OR 0.29, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The PSP-technique for BVS implantation improves long-term results and should also be recommended for newer generations of the bioresorbable scaffold.

Polymeric endovascular strut and lumen detection algorithm for intracoronary optical coherence tomography images

Polymeric endovascular implants are the next step in minimally invasive vascular interventions. As an alternative to traditional metallic drug-eluting stents, these often-erodible scaffolds present opportunities and challenges for patients and clinicians. Theoretically, as they resorb and are absorbed over time, they obviate the long-term complications of permanent implants, but in the short-term visualization and therefore positioning is problematic. Polymeric scaffolds can only be fully imaged using optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging-they are relatively invisible via angiography-and segmentation of polymeric struts in OCT images is performed manually, a laborious and intractable procedure for large datasets. Traditional lumen detection methods using implant struts as boundary limits fail in images with polymeric implants. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an automated method to detect polymeric struts and luminal borders in OCT images; we present such a fully automated algorithm. Accuracy was validated using expert annotations on 1140 OCT images with a positive predictive value of 0.93 for strut detection and an R2 correlation coefficient of 0.94 between detected and expert-annotated lumen areas. The proposed algorithm allows for rapid, accurate, and automated detection of polymeric struts and the luminal border in OCT images.

Low major adverse cardiac event rates following bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Impact of implantation technique on treatment outcomes

Background and objective

Studies conducted across the world have reported that the rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) following the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) are comparable to that noted with traditional drug eluting stents (DES). However, there is limited data on the immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes following the use of the Absorb BVS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, SA) in the Indian context. This study was conducted to determine real-world evidence on the immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes in all patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the Absorb BVS.

Methods

Data of all patients who were treated with Absorb BVS at our center were evaluated. Between December 2012 and October 2016, 142 patients underwent PCI with BVS. The MACE rates during hospitalization, at 30 days, 3 months, 6 months after PCI, and every 6 months thereafter were the primary endpoints evaluated with median follow up of 13 months.

Results

Mean age of the study participants was 53.7 ± 11.8 years. Intravascular ultrasound imaging was performed in 15.34% of patients. Predilatation and postdilatation were performed in 81.8% and 84.6% of scaffolds, respectively. There were no episodes of MACE during hospitalization. However, 1 BVS-related MACE was observed at the 1-month (0.7%) as well as at the ≥12 month (0.8%) follow up visits. At the 6- and 12-month follow up visits, 2 (1.5%) and 3 (2.5%) non-BVS-related MACEs, respectively, were recorded.

Conclusion

The use of Absorb BVS in this real-world experience was associated with very good immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes.

Impact of PSP Technique on Clinical Outcomes Following Bioresorbable Scaffolds Implantation

Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were introduced in clinical practice to overcome the long-term limitations of newer-generation drug-eluting stents. Despite some initial promising results of the Absorb BRS, safety concerns have led to the discontinuation of the commercialization of this device. Several retrospective studies have assessed the impact of the so-called Pre-dilation, Sizing and Post-dilation (PSP) technique concluding that an optimal PSP technique can improve clinical outcomes following BRS implantation. In this article, the definition of the PSP technique, and the current evidence of its impact on clinical outcomes are put in perspective. Additionality, the relationship between the PSP technique and the dual-antiplatelet therapy to prevent scaffold thrombosis is addressed. Finally, the future perspectives of BRS technology in clinical practice are commented.

Patient profile and periprocedural outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in comparison with drug-eluting and bare-metal stent implantation. Experience from ORPKI Polish National Registry 2014-2015

INTRODUCTION

There are limited data on the comparison of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and drug-eluting stent (DES)/bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in an unselected population of patients with coronary artery disease.

AIM

To compare the periprocedural outcomes and patient profile of BVS and DES/BMS implantation in an all-comer population from the ORPKI Polish National Registry.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 141,324 consecutive patients from 151 invasive cardiology centers in Poland were included in this prospective registry between January 2014 and June 2015. Periprocedural data on patients with at least one BVS (Absorb, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA), DES or BMS (all available types) implantation in de novo lesions during index percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina (SA) or acute coronary syndrome were collected.

RESULTS

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold was the most often used in patients with SA, in single-vessel disease and in younger male patients. Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation was significantly more often associated with periprocedural administration of ticagrelor/prasugrel (6.8% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.001) and use of intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography in comparison with the DES/BMS group (2.8% vs. 0.6% and 1.8% vs. 0.1%, respectively; p = 0.001 for both). The incidence of periprocedural death was significantly lower in the BVS group than the DES/BMS group (0.04% vs. 0.32%; p = 0.02), but this difference was no longer significant after adjustment for covariates. On the other hand, coronary artery perforation occurred significantly more often during BVS delivery (0.31% vs. 0.12%; p = 0.01), and BVS implantation was identified as an independent predictor of coronary artery perforation in multivariate logistic regression analysis (OR = 6.728, 95% CI: 2.394-18.906; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with BVS implantation presented an acceptable safety and efficacy profile in comparison with the DES/BMS group. However, lower risk patients were the most frequent candidates for BVS implantation.

Antithrombotic management in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention requiring oral anticoagulation

The dynamic evolution of therapeutic options including the use of vitamin K antagonists (VKA), non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC), more potent antiplatelet drugs as well as new generation drug-eluting stents could lead to the view that the current recommendations on the management of patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) requiring oral anticoagulation do not keep up with the results of several clinical studies published within the last 5 years. In the present overview, we summarize the recent advances in antithrombotic management used in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing PCI for stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The safety and efficacy of prasugrel and ticagrelor taken with oral anticoagulants also remain to be established in randomized trials; therefore the P2Y₁₂ inhibitor clopidogrel on top of aspirin or without is now recommended to be used together with a VKA or NOAC. It is still unclear which dose of a NOAC in combination with antiplatelet agents and different stents should be used in this clinical setting and whether indeed NOAC are safer compared with VKA in such cardiovascular patients. Moreover, we discuss the use of anticoagulation in addition to antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention in patients with ACS. To minimize bleeding risk in anticoagulated patients following PCI or ACS, the right agent should be prescribed to the right patient at the right dose and supported by regular clinical evaluation and laboratory testing, especially assessment of renal function when a NOAC is used.

Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds technology: current use and future developments

Coronary bioresorbable vascular scaffolds are a new appealing therapeutic option in interventional cardiology. The most used and studied is currently the Absorb BVS™. Its backbone is made of poly-L-lactide and coated by a thin layer of poly-D,L-lactide, it releases everolimus and is fully degraded to H2O and CO2 in 2-3 years. Absorb BVS™ seems to offer several theoretical advantages over metallic stent, as it gives temporary mechanical support to vessel wall without permanently caging it. Therefore, long-term endothelial function and structure are not affected. A possible future surgical revascularization is not compromised. Natural vasomotion in response to external stimuli is also recovered. Several observational and randomized trials have been published about BVS clinical outcomes. The main aim of this review is to carry out a systematic analysis about Absorb BVS™ studies, evaluating also the technical improvements of the Absorb GT1 BVS™.

Twelve months clinical outcome after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in patients with stable angina and acute coronary syndrome. Data from the Polish National Registry

Introduction

There are limited data describing bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation in complex lesions. Only short-term clinical outcomes are available for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Aim

To evaluate 12-month clinical outcome, safety and effectiveness of BVS implantation in complex lesions and in stable angina (SA) or ACS.

Material and methods

Five hundred ninety-one patients with SA/ACS were enrolled between October 2012 and November 2013 in 30 invasive cardiology centres in Poland. At least one BVS implantation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was the only inclusion criteria. The clinical endpoint was the occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR) with urgent PCI or target vessel revascularisation (TVR) with urgent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)) and device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) (cardiac death, urgent target vessel revascularisation with PCI/CABG, target vessel MI) during 12-month follow-up.

Results

After 12 months TLR with urgent PCI was significantly more often reported in patients with diagnosed UA (4.59%; p < 0.02) in comparison with other PCI indications. No significant differences were found in terms of composite MACE endpoint, cumulative MACE (p = 0.09), stent thrombosis (p = 0.2) or restenosis (p = 0.2). There were no significant differences in cumulative MACE and composite MACE endpoint between patients with no/mild versus moderate/severe tortuosity and no/mild versus moderate/severe calcification of the target vessel. No significant difference was found between groups of patients with or without bifurcation of the target vessel. Device-oriented composite endpoint was significantly more often reported in the ACS group (3.2% vs. 0.47%; p < 0.03), most frequently in patients with diagnosed UA (5.5%).

Conclusions

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold can be successfully and safely used for ACS treatment and in lesions of higher complexity.