Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, Fujita Health University Hospital, Toyoake, Japan.
Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 May;7(5):482-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.155. Epub 2014 Apr 16.
The aim of this study was to evaluate 1-year clinical outcomes of diabetic patients treated with the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS).
Clinical outcomes of diabetic patients after BVS implantation have been unreported.
This study included 101 patients in the ABSORB Cohort B trial and the first consecutive 450 patients with 1 year of follow-up in the ABSORB EXTEND trial. A total of 136 diabetic patients were compared with 415 nondiabetic patients. In addition, 882 diabetic patients treated with everolimus-eluting metal stents (EES) in pooled data from the SPIRIT trials (SPIRIT FIRST [Clinical Trial of the Abbott Vascular XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System], SPIRIT II [A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System], SPIRIT III [Clinical Trial of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System (EECSS)], SPIRIT IV Clinical Trial [Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System]) were used for the comparison by applying propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE), including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up.
The cumulative incidence of DoCE did not differ between diabetic and nondiabetic patients treated with the BVS (3.7% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.64). Diabetic patients treated with the BVS had a similar incidence of the DoCE compared with diabetic patients treated with EES in the matched study group (3.9% for the BVS vs. 6.4% for EES, p = 0.38). There were no differences in the incidence of definite or probable scaffold/stent thrombosis (0.7% for both diabetic and nondiabetic patients with the BVS; 1.0% for diabetic patients with the BVS vs. 1.7% for diabetic patients with EES in the matched study group).
In the present analyses, diabetic patients treated with the BVS showed similar rates of DoCEs compared with nondiabetic patients treated with the BVS and diabetic patients treated with EES at 1-year follow-up. (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B; NCT00856856; ABSORB EXTEND Clinical Investigation; NCT01023789; Clinical Trial of the Abbott Vascular XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [SPIRIT FIRST]; NCT00180453; A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [SPIRIT II]; NCT00180310; Clinical Trial of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [EECSS] [SPIRIT III]; NCT00180479; Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [SPIRIT IV Clinical Trial]; NCT00307047).
本研究旨在评估接受 Absorb 生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)治疗的糖尿病患者的 1 年临床结局。
糖尿病患者接受 BVS 植入后的临床结局尚未报道。
本研究纳入了 ABSORB Cohort B 试验中的 101 例患者和 ABSORB EXTEND 试验中随访 1 年的前 450 例连续患者。共比较了 136 例糖尿病患者和 415 例非糖尿病患者。此外,来自 SPIRIT 试验(SPIRIT FIRST [雅培血管 XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床试验]、SPIRIT II [XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床评估]、SPIRIT III [XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床试验]、SPIRIT IV 临床试验 [XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床评估])的汇总数据中,使用倾向性评分匹配对 882 例接受依维莫司洗脱金属支架(EES)治疗的糖尿病患者进行了比较。主要终点为器械导向的复合终点(DoCE),包括 1 年随访时的心脏死亡、靶血管心肌梗死和靶病变血运重建。
接受 BVS 治疗的糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者的 DoCE 累积发生率无差异(3.7% vs. 5.1%,p=0.64)。在匹配研究组中,接受 BVS 治疗的糖尿病患者的 DoCE 发生率与接受 EES 治疗的糖尿病患者相似(BVS 组为 3.9%,EES 组为 6.4%,p=0.38)。支架血栓形成的发生率(支架/血管内血栓形成)在糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者中无差异(BVS 组分别为 0.7%和 0.7%;BVS 组的糖尿病患者为 1.0%,匹配研究组中接受 EES 治疗的糖尿病患者为 1.7%)。
在本分析中,接受 BVS 治疗的糖尿病患者在 1 年随访时的 DoCE 发生率与接受 BVS 治疗的非糖尿病患者和接受 EES 治疗的糖尿病患者相似。(ABSORB 临床研究,Cohort B;NCT00856856;ABSORB EXTEND 临床研究;NCT01023789;雅培血管 XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床试验[SPIRIT FIRST];NCT00180453;XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床评估[SPIRIT II];NCT00180310;XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床试验[EECSS] [SPIRIT III];NCT00180479;XIENCE V 依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统的临床评估[SPIRIT IV 临床试验];NCT00307047)。