TY - JOUR
T1 - Implications of a bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation on vessel wall strain of the treated and the adjacent segments
AU - Bourantas, Christos V.
AU - Garcia-Garcia, Hector M.
AU - Campos, Carlos A.M.
AU - Zhang, Yao Jun
AU - Muramatsu, Takashi
AU - Morel, Marie Angèle
AU - Nakatani, Shimpei
AU - Gao, Xingyu
AU - Cho, Yun Kyeong
AU - Isibashi, Yuki
AU - Gijsen, Frank J.H.
AU - Onuma, Yoshinobu
AU - Serruys, Patrick W.
N1 - Funding Information:
The ABSORB Cohort B trial (A Clinical Evaluation of the Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System the Treatment of Patients with de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) was a prospective multicenter single-arm study designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the Absorb BVS 1.1 (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) [10]. One hundred one patients were included in this study and were divided in two groups (B1 and B2). The first group had invasive imaging evaluation [i.e., coronary angiography, grayscale intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), IVUS virtual histology, palpographic and optical coherence tomographic imaging] at baseline, 6 months and 2 years follow-up; while the second group had the abovementioned invasive tests at baseline, 1 year and at 3 years follow-up. Optical coherence tomographic (OCT) examination was optional and was not performed in all the studied patients. The current analysis included only the patients who had a palpographic assessment at least at one time point. The Absorb Cohort B study was sponsored and financially supported by Abbott Vascular.
PY - 2014/3
Y1 - 2014/3
N2 - Background: Metallic stents change permanently the mechanical properties of the vessel wall. However little is known about the implications of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) on the vessel wall strain. Methods: Patients (n = 53) implanted with an Absorb BVS that had palpographic evaluation at any time point [before device implantation, immediate after treatment, at short-term (6-12 months) or mid-term follow-up (24-36 months)] were included in the current analysis. The palpographic data were used to estimate the mean of the maximum strain values and the obtained measurements were classified using the Rotterdam classification (ROC) score and expressed as ROC/mm. Results: Scaffold implantation led to a significant decrease of the vessel wall strain in the treated segment [0.35 (0.20, 0.38) vs. 0.19 (0.09, 0.29); P = 0.005] but it did not affect the proximal and distal edge. In patients who had serial palpographic examination the vessel wall strain continued to decrease in the scaffolded segment at short-term [0.20 (0.12, 0.29) vs. 0.14 (0.08, 0.20); P = 0.048] and mid-term follow-up [0.20 (0.12, 0.29) vs. 0.15 (0.10, 0.19), P = 0.024]. No changes were noted with time in the mechanical properties of the vessel wall at the proximal and distal edge. Conclusions: Absorb BVS implantation results in a permanent alteration of the mechanical properties of the vessel wall in the treated segment. Long term follow-up data are needed in order to examine the clinical implications of these findings.
AB - Background: Metallic stents change permanently the mechanical properties of the vessel wall. However little is known about the implications of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) on the vessel wall strain. Methods: Patients (n = 53) implanted with an Absorb BVS that had palpographic evaluation at any time point [before device implantation, immediate after treatment, at short-term (6-12 months) or mid-term follow-up (24-36 months)] were included in the current analysis. The palpographic data were used to estimate the mean of the maximum strain values and the obtained measurements were classified using the Rotterdam classification (ROC) score and expressed as ROC/mm. Results: Scaffold implantation led to a significant decrease of the vessel wall strain in the treated segment [0.35 (0.20, 0.38) vs. 0.19 (0.09, 0.29); P = 0.005] but it did not affect the proximal and distal edge. In patients who had serial palpographic examination the vessel wall strain continued to decrease in the scaffolded segment at short-term [0.20 (0.12, 0.29) vs. 0.14 (0.08, 0.20); P = 0.048] and mid-term follow-up [0.20 (0.12, 0.29) vs. 0.15 (0.10, 0.19), P = 0.024]. No changes were noted with time in the mechanical properties of the vessel wall at the proximal and distal edge. Conclusions: Absorb BVS implantation results in a permanent alteration of the mechanical properties of the vessel wall in the treated segment. Long term follow-up data are needed in order to examine the clinical implications of these findings.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899072644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899072644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10554-014-0373-4
DO - 10.1007/s10554-014-0373-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 24458954
AN - SCOPUS:84899072644
SN - 1569-5794
VL - 30
SP - 477
EP - 484
JO - International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
JF - International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
IS - 3
ER -