Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Dec 1;66(21):2298-2309. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.09.054. Epub 2015 Oct 12.
The everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) is designed to achieve results comparable to metallic drug-eluting stents at 1 year, with improved long-term outcomes. Whether the 1-year clinical and angiographic results of BVS are noninferior to current-generation drug-eluting stents has not been established.
This study sought to evaluate the angiographic efficacy and clinical safety and effectiveness of BVS in a randomized trial designed to enable approval of the BVS in China.
Eligible patients with 1 or 2 de novo native coronary artery lesions were randomized to BVS or cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES) in a 1:1 ratio stratified by diabetes and the number of lesions treated. Angiographic and clinical follow-up were planned at 1 year in all patients. The primary endpoint was angiographic in-segment late loss (LL), powered for noninferiority with a margin of 0.15 mm.
A total of 480 patients were randomized (241 BVS vs. 239 CoCr-EES) at 24 sites. Acute clinical device success (98.0% vs. 99.6%; p = 0.22) and procedural success (97.0% and 98.3%; p = 0.37) were comparable in BVS- and CoCr-EES-treated patients, respectively. The primary endpoint of in-segment LL at 1 year was 0.19 ± 0.38 mm for BVS versus 0.13 ± 0.38 mm for CoCr-EES; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 0.14 mm, achieving noninferiority of BVS compared with CoCr-EES (pnoninferiority = 0.01). BVS and CoCr-EES also had similar 1-year rates of target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization; 3.4% vs. 4.2%, respectively; p = 0.62) and definite/probable scaffold/stent thrombosis (0.4% vs. 0.0%, respectively; p = 1.00).
In the present multicenter randomized trial, BVS was noninferior to CoCr-EES for the primary endpoint of in-segment LL at 1 year. (A Clinical Evaluation of Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold [Absorb BVS] System in Chinese Population-ABSORB CHINA Randomized Controlled Trial [RCT]; NCT01923740).
依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)旨在实现与金属药物洗脱支架在 1 年内相当的结果,同时改善长期预后。BVS 的 1 年临床和血管造影结果是否不劣于现有一代药物洗脱支架尚未得到证实。
本研究旨在评估 BVS 的血管造影疗效和临床安全性和有效性,该研究为在中国批准 BVS 进行了一项随机试验设计。
符合条件的 1 或 2 个新出现的原生冠状动脉病变患者按糖尿病和治疗病变数量以 1:1 的比例分层,随机分配至 BVS 或钴铬依维莫司洗脱支架(CoCr-EES)。所有患者均计划在 1 年时进行血管造影和临床随访。主要终点是血管造影节段内晚期丢失(LL),采用 0.15mm 的边界进行非劣效性检验。
共在 24 个中心随机分配了 480 名患者(BVS 组 241 名,CoCr-EES 组 239 名)。BVS 组和 CoCr-EES 组的急性临床器械成功率(98.0% vs. 99.6%;p=0.22)和手术成功率(97.0% vs. 98.3%;p=0.37)相当。BVS 组和 CoCr-EES 组 1 年时的节段内 LL 主要终点分别为 0.19±0.38mm 和 0.13±0.38mm;差值的单侧 97.5%置信上限为 0.14mm,BVS 与 CoCr-EES 相比具有非劣效性(pnoninferiority=0.01)。BVS 和 CoCr-EES 在 1 年时的靶病变失败率(心源性死亡、靶血管心肌梗死或缺血驱动的靶病变血运重建)也相似(分别为 3.4%和 4.2%,p=0.62),明确/可能的支架/血栓形成也相似(分别为 0.4%和 0.0%,p=1.00)。
在这项多中心随机试验中,BVS 在 1 年时的节段内 LL 主要终点不劣于 CoCr-EES。