Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Sep 25;10(18):1841-1851. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.06.064. Epub 2017 Aug 30.
This study sought to assess the value of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).
Currently both drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-eluting balloons (DEB) are recommended in patients with ISR. However, the value of BVS in this setting remains unclear.
RIBS VI (Restenosis Intra-stent: drug-eluting Balloon vs everolimus-eluting Stent) was a prospective multicenter study (19 Spanish sites) that included 141 patients treated with BVS for either bare-metal stent (BMS) ISR or DES-ISR. Late angiography was scheduled at 6 to 9 months. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were similar to those used in the RIBS IV (patients with DES-ISR) and RIBS V (patients with BMS-ISR) trials, where DEB (n = 249) was compared with everolimus (EES)-DES (n = 249). Results of BVS in RIBS VI were compared with those obtained with DEB and EES in the RIBS IV and V trials.
On late angiography (n = 134; 95% of eligible) the in-segment minimal lumen diameter (primary endpoint) was 1.87 ± 0.5 mm, late lumen loss was 0.23 ± 0.4 mm, and restenosis rate was 11%. At 1-year follow-up (100% of patients) no patient died, 4 (2.8%) experienced a myocardial infarction, and 16 (11.3%) required target lesion revascularization. One patient (0.7%) who discontinued antiplatelet therapy experienced definitive BVS thrombosis. Freedom from cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization was 86%. The minimal lumen diameter at follow-up after BVS was similar to that obtained with DEB (1.88 ± 0.6 mm; p = NS) but smaller than that achieved after EES (2.16 ± 0.7 mm; p < 0.001). Likewise, target lesion revascularization rates after BVS were similar to those seen with DEB (10.4%) but higher than with EES (3.2%; p < 0.001). Results remained unchanged after adjusting for potential confounders in baseline characteristics.
This study suggests the safety and efficacy of BVS in patients with ISR. In this challenging anatomic scenario BVS obtained late angiographic and clinical results similar to DEB but inferior to EES. (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment [RIBS VI]; NCT02672878).
本研究旨在评估生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)在支架内再狭窄(ISR)患者中的应用价值。
目前,药物洗脱支架(DES)和药物洗脱球囊(DEB)均被推荐用于 ISR 患者。然而,BVS 在这种情况下的价值尚不清楚。
RIBS VI(支架内再狭窄:药物洗脱球囊与依维莫司洗脱支架)是一项前瞻性多中心研究(19 个西班牙研究中心),共纳入 141 例因裸金属支架(BMS)ISR 或 DES-ISR 而接受 BVS 治疗的患者。晚期血管造影在 6 至 9 个月进行。纳入/排除标准与 RIBS IV(DES-ISR 患者)和 RIBS V(BMS-ISR 患者)试验相似,其中 DEB(n=249)与依维莫司洗脱支架(EES-DES)(n=249)进行了比较。RIBS VI 中 BVS 的结果与 RIBS IV 和 V 试验中 DEB 和 EES 的结果进行了比较。
在晚期血管造影(n=134;符合条件的患者的 95%)中,节段内最小管腔直径(主要终点)为 1.87±0.5mm,晚期管腔丢失为 0.23±0.4mm,再狭窄率为 11%。在 1 年随访(100%的患者)时,无患者死亡,4 例(2.8%)发生心肌梗死,16 例(11.3%)需要靶病变血运重建。1 例(0.7%)停止抗血小板治疗的患者发生明确的 BVS 血栓形成。无心脏死亡、心肌梗死和靶病变血运重建的患者为 86%。BVS 随访后的最小管腔直径与 DEB 相似(1.88±0.6mm;p=NS),但小于 EES 的最小管腔直径(2.16±0.7mm;p<0.001)。同样,BVS 后的靶病变血运重建率与 DEB 相似(10.4%),但高于 EES(3.2%;p<0.001)。在调整基线特征的潜在混杂因素后,结果保持不变。
本研究提示 BVS 在 ISR 患者中的安全性和疗效。在这种具有挑战性的解剖学情况下,BVS 获得的晚期血管造影和临床结果与 DEB 相似,但劣于 EES。(支架内再狭窄:生物可吸收血管支架治疗[RIBS VI];NCT02672878)。