CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Native Coronary Arteries Versus on Saphenous Venous Aorta Coronary Conduits in Patients With Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Impella Device Implantation Achieved or Attempted (from the PROTECT II Randomized Trial and the cVAD Registry) 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: lipid modification to reduce cardiovascular risk: The Task Force for the management of dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) A Controlled Trial of Rivaroxaban After Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement Extended antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel alone versus clopidogrel plus aspirin after completion of 9- to 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndrome patients with both high bleeding and ischemic risk. Rationale and design of the OPT-BIRISK double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial Effect of the PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab on Total Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Cardiovascular DiseaseA Prespecified Analysis From the FOURIER Trial Long-Term Outcomes After PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease According to Lesion Location Revascularization in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis 5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial Comparison of Early Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Conservative Management in Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: Results From the TOPAS Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Clinical Trial2018 Aug 16.

JOURNAL:Cardiovasc Revasc Med. Article Link

A randomised trial comparing two stent sizing strategies in coronary bifurcation treatment with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - The Absorb Bifurcation Coronary (ABC) trial

Rampat R, Mayo T, Hildick-Smith D et al. Keywords: Absorb; BVS; Bioresorbable vascular scaffold; Coronary bifurcation

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUNDLimited information is available on the use of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (BVS) in bifurcations involving significant side branches. When treating bifurcation disease with metal stents, the recommendation is to choose a stent diameter based on the distal main vessel diameter. Whether this sizing strategy is applicable to BVS is currently unknown.


METHODS - We randomised 37 patients undergoing elective PCI for 'false' bifurcation disease (Medina 0,1,0; 1,0,0; 1,1,0) to receive BVS based either on proximal or distal reference diameters. Optical Frequency Domain Imaging (OFDI) measurements were performed pre BVS insertion to obtain proximal and distal reference diameters and post implantation. BVS size was chosen according to the proximal or distal reference diameter as per randomisation. Implantation was performed using the PSP technique tailored to bifurcation stenting. OFDI was repeated post implantation to confirm satisfactory expansion and apposition.

RESULTS - Baseline demographics between the two groups were similar. Patients were aged 62.8 ± 3.3 years; 76% were male. Mean side branch diameter was 2.24 ± 0.13 mm. TIMI III flow in the main vessel was achieved in all cases. Side branch occlusion occurred in 1 case (2.7%). In the distal-sizing arm, there was a greater incidence of significant malapposition (>300 μm) at the proximal end of the scaffold on OCT (2.3% versus 0.8%, p 0.023). The incidence of distal edge dissections was numerically greater in the proximal-sizing group but this was not statistically significant (31.3% vs 11.8%, p 0.17).

CONCLUSION - Both proximal and distal sizing strategies have similar procedural complication rates when using the ABSORB BVS to treat coronary bifurcations. However a proximal sizing strategy is associated with less malapposition and may be preferable.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.