Interventional Cardiology Unit, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus, Milan, Italy; Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Interventional Cardiology Unit, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus, Milan, Italy; Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Department of Cardiology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Mar 27;10(6):539-547. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.12.285.
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have become an attractive option in the percutaneous coronary intervention field due to the potential advantages associated with the complete resorption process that occurs within a few years. However, current-generation BVS have several limitations including thicker struts, reduced radial strength, and limited expansion capability when compared with drug-eluting stents (DES). As a result, complex coronary disease often contains BVS-inappropriate/unfavorable segments. This does not necessarily mean that BVS use must be completely avoided, and minimizing the length of permanent metallic caging may still be advantageous. Operators should fully understand the limitations of current BVS, and when to consider a hybrid strategy of BVS in combination with DES or drug-coated balloons.
生物可吸收血管支架（BVS）由于其在几年内完全吸收的潜在优势，已成为经皮冠状动脉介入治疗领域的一个有吸引力的选择。然而，与药物洗脱支架（DES）相比，目前的 BVS 存在几个局限性，包括较厚的支柱、降低的径向强度和有限的扩张能力。因此，复杂的冠状动脉疾病通常包含不适合/不利的 BVS 段。这并不一定意味着必须完全避免使用 BVS，尽量减少永久性金属笼的长度可能仍然是有利的。术者应充分了解目前 BVS 的局限性，以及何时考虑将 BVS 与 DES 或药物涂层球囊联合使用的混合策略。
