Rizik David G, Hermiller James B, Simonton Charles A, Klassen Kevin J, Kereiakes Dean J
aHonorHealth and the Scottsdale-Lincoln Health Network bHonorHealth, Scottsdale Shea Medical Center, Scottsdale, Arizona cSt Vincent Heart Center, Indianapolis, Indiana dAbbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California eThe Christ Hospital, Heart and Vascular Center and The Lindner Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Coron Artery Dis. 2017 Jan;28(1):77-89. doi: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000000414.
Although current everolimus-eluting coronary stents have shown improved event-free survival within the first year following implantation compared with bare-metal stents or earlier generation drug-eluting stents, they remain associated with an ongoing risk for adverse outcomes (thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and restenosis) beyond 1 year at rates similar to those observed following bare-metal stent deployment. This ongoing very late hazard has been attributed to the permanent presence of the metal frame and/or polymer in these stents. The Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) has been developed to provide mechanical support and drug-delivery functions similar to metallic drug-eluting stents, followed by complete resorption with recovery of more normal vascular structure and function, thus avoiding the limitations associated with permanent metallic endovascular prostheses. Absorb BVS has shown safety and efficacy in the dedicated clinical trial development program of Abbott Vascular and in an array of investigator-sponsored studies involving a broad spectrum of clinical (patient) as well as coronary anatomic complexity. Longer-term evidence, largely limited to single-arm studies, appears to reflect durable safety and efficacy and suggests Absorb BVS to be an attractive therapeutic option. Interim evidence from a series of randomized-clinical trials (RCTs) comparing Absorb BVS with the Xience cobalt-chromium metallic everolimus-eluting stent has shown noninferiority of Absorb BVS with respect to target lesion failure (composite occurrence of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) beyond the first year, with no statistically significant differences in other safety/efficacy measures. However, concerns do exist in terms of increased rates of scaffold thrombosis, the risk for which may be mitigated by improved patient and lesion selection, procedural technique, and device iteration. We provide an overview of the evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention, in-vivo characterization of Absorb BVS resorption, and a summary with a critical evaluation of available evidence from RCTs, pooled analyses, and meta-analyses of RCTs for the safety and efficacy of Absorb BVS obtained primarily following the treatment of noncomplex coronary lesions in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and/or stabilized acute coronary syndromes.
尽管与裸金属支架或早期一代药物洗脱支架相比,目前的依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架在植入后的第一年显示出无事件生存率有所提高,但在1年之后,它们仍与不良后果(血栓形成、心肌梗死和再狭窄)的持续风险相关,其发生率与裸金属支架植入后观察到的发生率相似。这种持续存在的非常晚期风险归因于这些支架中金属框架和/或聚合物的永久存在。Absorb依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收血管支架(Absorb BVS)的研发目的是提供与金属药物洗脱支架类似的机械支撑和药物递送功能,随后完全吸收,使血管结构和功能恢复得更正常,从而避免与永久性金属血管内假体相关的局限性。Absorb BVS在雅培血管公司的专用临床试验开发项目以及一系列由研究者发起的研究中均显示出安全性和有效性,这些研究涉及广泛的临床(患者)以及冠状动脉解剖复杂性。长期证据在很大程度上仅限于单臂研究,似乎反映了持久的安全性和有效性,并表明Absorb BVS是一个有吸引力的治疗选择。一系列将Absorb BVS与Xience钴铬金属依维莫司洗脱支架进行比较的随机临床试验(RCT)的中期证据表明,在第一年之后,Absorb BVS在靶病变失败(心源性死亡、靶血管相关心肌梗死和缺血驱动的靶病变血运重建的复合发生)方面不劣于Xience钴铬金属依维莫司洗脱支架,在其他安全性/有效性指标上无统计学显著差异。然而,对于支架血栓形成率增加确实存在担忧,通过改进患者和病变选择、手术技术以及器械迭代,这种风险可能会降低。我们概述了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的发展、Absorb BVS吸收的体内特征,并对主要在稳定型缺血性心脏病和/或稳定型急性冠状动脉综合征患者的非复杂性冠状动脉病变治疗后获得的关于Absorb BVS安全性和有效性的RCT、汇总分析以及RCT的荟萃分析的现有证据进行批判性评估并总结。