NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; Clinical Trials Center, Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Lancet. 2018 Oct 27;392(10157):1530-1540. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32283-9. Epub 2018 Sep 25.
Previous studies showed more adverse events with coronary bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) than with metallic drug-eluting stents (DES), although in one randomised trial angina was reduced with BVS. However, these early studies were unmasked, lesions smaller than intended for the scaffold were frequently enrolled, implantation technique was suboptimal, and patients with myocardial infarction, in whom BVS might be well suited, were excluded.
In the active-controlled, blinded, multicentre, randomised ABSORB IV trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes aged 18 years or older were recruited from 147 hospitals in five countries (the USA, Germany, Australia, Singapore, and Canada). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive polymeric everolimus-eluting BVS (Absorb; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) with optimised implantation technique or cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (EES; Xience; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Randomisation was stratified by diabetic status, whether patients would have been eligible for enrolment in the previous ABSORB III trial, and site. Patients and clinical assessors were masked to randomisation. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation) at 30 days, tested for non-inferiority with a 2·9% margin for the risk difference. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02173379, and is closed to accrual.
Between Aug 15, 2014, and March 31, 2017, we screened 18 722 patients for eligibility, 2604 of whom were enrolled. 1296 patients were assigned to BVS, and 1308 patients were assigned to EES. Follow-up data at 30 days and 1 year, respectively, were available for 1288 and 1254 patients with BVS and for 1303 and 1272 patients with EES. Biomarker-positive acute coronary syndromes were present in 622 (24%) of 2602 patients, and, by angiographic core laboratory analysis, 78 (3%) of 2893 of lesions were in very small vessels. Target lesion failure at 30 days occurred in 64 (5·0%) patients assigned to BVS and 48 (3·7%) patients assigned to EES (difference 1·3%, upper 97·5% confidence limit 2·89; one-sided p=0·0244). Target lesion failure at 1 year occurred in 98 (7·8%) patients assigned to BVS and 82 (6·4%) patients assigned to EES (difference 1·4%, upper 97·5% confidence limit 3·4; one-sided p=0·0006). Angina, adjudicated by a central events committee at 1 year, occurred in 270 (20·3%) patients assigned to BVS and 274 (20·5%) patients assigned to EES (difference -0·3%, 95% CI -3·4% to 2·9%; one-sided p=0·0008; two-sided p=0·8603). Device thrombosis within 1 year occurred in nine (0·7%) patients assigned to BVS and four (0·3%) patients assigned to EES (p=0·1586).
Polymeric BVS implanted with optimised technique in an expanded patient population resulted in non-inferior 30-day and 1-year rates of target lesion failure and angina compared with metallic DES.
Abbott Vascular.
先前的研究表明,生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)的不良事件比金属药物洗脱支架(DES)更多,尽管在一项随机试验中,BVS 降低了心绞痛的发生率。然而,这些早期研究是未掩饰的,支架常被应用于比预期更小的病变,植入技术并不理想,而且心肌梗死患者(BVS 可能在这些患者中效果良好)被排除在外。
在主动对照、盲法、多中心、随机 ABSORB IV 试验中,从五个国家(美国、德国、澳大利亚、新加坡和加拿大)的 147 家医院招募了年龄在 18 岁或以上的稳定型冠状动脉疾病或急性冠状动脉综合征患者。入选患者被随机(1:1)分配接受优化植入技术的聚合物依维莫司洗脱 BVS(Absorb;雅培血管,圣克拉拉,加利福尼亚州,美国)或钴铬依维莫司洗脱支架(EES;Xience;雅培血管,圣克拉拉,加利福尼亚州,美国)。随机分组按糖尿病状态、患者是否有资格参加之前的 ABSORB III 试验以及试验地点进行分层。患者和临床评估者对随机分组情况不知情。主要终点是 30 天时的靶病变失败(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),采用风险差 2.9%的非劣效性检验。分析采用意向治疗。该试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,编号为 NCT02173379,现已停止入组。
2014 年 8 月 15 日至 2017 年 3 月 31 日,我们对 18722 例患者进行了筛选,其中 2604 例符合入选标准。1296 例患者被分配至 BVS 组,1308 例患者被分配至 EES 组。分别有 1288 例和 1254 例 BVS 组患者以及 1303 例和 1272 例 EES 组患者获得了 30 天和 1 年的随访数据。在 2602 例患者中,24%(622 例)为生物标志物阳性的急性冠状动脉综合征,通过血管造影核心实验室分析,2893 例病变中有 3%(78 例)为非常小血管病变。30 天时,BVS 组有 64 例(5.0%)患者发生靶病变失败,EES 组有 48 例(3.7%)患者发生靶病变失败(差异 1.3%,97.5%置信上限 2.89;单侧 p=0.0244)。1 年时,BVS 组有 98 例(7.8%)患者发生靶病变失败,EES 组有 82 例(6.4%)患者发生靶病变失败(差异 1.4%,97.5%置信上限 3.4;单侧 p=0.0006)。1 年时,通过中心事件委员会判定的心绞痛在 BVS 组和 EES 组中分别发生在 270 例(20.3%)和 274 例(20.5%)患者中(差异 -0.3%,95%CI -3.4%至 2.9%;单侧 p=0.0008;双侧 p=0.8603)。BVS 组有 9 例(0.7%)患者和 EES 组有 4 例(0.3%)患者在 1 年内发生器械血栓形成(p=0.1586)。
在更广泛的患者人群中,采用优化技术植入聚合物 BVS,与金属 DES 相比,30 天和 1 年的靶病变失败和心绞痛发生率无差异。
雅培血管。