• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting stents: final five-year results of the AIDA randomised clinical trial.依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架与依维莫司洗脱支架的长期临床结果:AIDA 随机临床试验的最终 5 年结果。
EuroIntervention. 2022 Mar 18;17(16):1340-1347. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00419.
2
Clinical outcomes at 2 years of the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus the Xience drug-eluting metallic stent in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome versus stable coronary disease-AIDA trial substudy.急性冠状动脉综合征与稳定型冠状动脉疾病患者中Absorb生物可吸收血管支架与Xience药物洗脱金属支架2年临床结局——AIDA试验子研究
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan;95(1):89-96. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28193. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
3
Three-year clinical outcomes of the absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold compared to Xience everolimus-eluting stent in routine PCI in patients with diabetes mellitus-AIDA sub-study.在常规经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中,与依维莫司洗脱支架相比,生物可吸收血管支架的 3 年临床结果:糖尿病患者 AIDA 亚组研究。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Oct;98(4):713-720. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29329. Epub 2020 Oct 29.
4
1-year clinical outcomes of diabetic patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: a pooled analysis of the ABSORB and the SPIRIT trials.依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收血管支架治疗糖尿病患者 1 年的临床结果:ABSORB 和 SPIRIT 试验的汇总分析。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 May;7(5):482-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.155. Epub 2014 Apr 16.
5
1-Year Outcomes of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents: A Propensity-Matched Comparison of the GHOST-EU and XIENCE V USA Registries.依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架与依维莫司洗脱支架的1年结局:GHOST-EU和XIENCE V美国注册研究的倾向匹配比较
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Mar 14;9(5):440-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.10.042. Epub 2016 Jan 6.
6
Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, single-blind, multicentre clinical trial.对比依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架与依维莫司洗脱金属支架治疗冠状动脉狭窄的疗效(ABSORB II):3 年随机、对照、单盲、多中心临床试验。
Lancet. 2016 Nov 19;388(10059):2479-2491. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32050-5. Epub 2016 Oct 30.
7
Complete two-year follow-up with formal non-inferiority testing on primary outcomes of the AIDA trial comparing the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold with the XIENCE drug-eluting metallic stent in routine PCI.对 AIDA 试验的主要结局进行为期两年的随访,并进行正式的非劣效性检验,该试验比较了在常规 PCI 中使用 Absorb 生物可吸收支架与 XIENCE 药物洗脱金属支架。
EuroIntervention. 2018 Jul 20;14(4):e426-e433. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00335.
8
Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus everolimus-eluting metallic stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 1-year results of a propensity score matching comparison: the BVS-EXAMINATION Study (bioresorbable vascular scaffold-a clinical evaluation of everolimus eluting coronary stents in the treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction).生物可吸收血管支架与依维莫司洗脱金属支架治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死:倾向评分匹配比较的 1 年结果:BVS-EXAMINATION 研究(生物可吸收血管支架——依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的临床评估)。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Jan;8(1 Pt B):189-197. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.10.005.
9
The relationship of pre-procedural Dmax based sizing to lesion level outcomes in Absorb BVS and Xience EES treated patients in the AIDA trial.在AIDA试验中,接受Absorb生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)和Xience依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)治疗的患者,术前基于Dmax的尺寸选择与病变水平结局的关系。
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Jul;35(7):1189-1198. doi: 10.1007/s10554-019-01576-y. Epub 2019 Mar 25.
10
Randomised comparison of a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold with a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de novo native coronary artery lesions: the 2-year clinical outcomes of the ABSORB II trial.生物可吸收依维莫司洗脱支架与金属依维莫司洗脱支架治疗初发原位冠状动脉病变所致缺血性心脏病的随机对照研究:ABSORB II试验的2年临床结果
EuroIntervention. 2016 Oct 20;12(9):1102-1107. doi: 10.4244/EIJY16M08_01.

引用本文的文献

1
Firesorb bioresorbable scaffold for de novo coronary artery disease: 1-year clinical outcomes.用于初发性冠状动脉疾病的Firesorb生物可吸收支架:1年临床结果
BMC Med. 2025 Jul 9;23(1):419. doi: 10.1186/s12916-025-04254-0.
2
Mechanobiology in Action: Biomaterials, Devices, and the Cellular Machinery of Force Sensing.生物力学在行动:生物材料、装置与力传感的细胞机制
Biomolecules. 2025 Jun 10;15(6):848. doi: 10.3390/biom15060848.
3
Impact of lesion preparation and stent optimisation on lesion-oriented events in PCI with drug-eluting stents: 5-year results from the AIDA trial.病变准备和支架优化对药物洗脱支架经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中病变相关事件的影响:AIDA试验5年结果
Neth Heart J. 2025 Apr;33(4):130-137. doi: 10.1007/s12471-025-01937-4. Epub 2025 Mar 6.
4
Five-Year Outcomes of Bioresorbable Stent Therapy for Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.生物可吸收支架治疗冠心病的五年结局:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Jun 28;25(7):238. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2507238. eCollection 2024 Jul.
5
Bioresorbable Scaffolds for Below-the-Knee Arterial Disease: A Literature Review of New Developments.用于膝下动脉疾病的生物可吸收支架:新进展的文献综述
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Apr 3;25(4):133. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2504133. eCollection 2024 Apr.
6
Thrombosis and myocardial infarction: the role of bioresorbable scaffolds.血栓形成与心肌梗死:生物可吸收支架的作用
J Cardiovasc Aging. 2023 Feb;3(1). doi: 10.20517/jca.2022.41. Epub 2023 Jan 1.
7
Safety and Efficacy of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Real-World Practice.在真实世界实践中,依维莫司洗脱可降解血管支架与第二代药物洗脱支架的安全性和疗效。
J Korean Med Sci. 2023 Feb 6;38(5):e34. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e34.
8
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus conventional drug-eluting stents across time: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.生物可吸收血管支架与传统药物洗脱支架随时间变化的比较:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Open Heart. 2022 Oct;9(2). doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002107.
9
Bioabsorbable coronary stents - should they be buried?生物可吸收冠状动脉支架——它们应该被摒弃吗?
EuroIntervention. 2022 Mar 18;17(16):1286-1287. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-E-21-00012.

本文引用的文献

1
Clinical significance of neoatherosclerosis observed at very late phase between 3 and 7 years after coronary stent implantation.冠状动脉支架置入后 3 至 7 年晚期观察到的新生动脉粥样硬化的临床意义。
J Cardiol. 2021 Jul;78(1):58-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2021.01.005. Epub 2021 Jan 27.
2
10-Year Outcomes From a Randomized Trial of Polymer-Free Versus Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Coronary Stents.无聚合物药物洗脱冠状动脉支架与耐用聚合物药物洗脱冠状动脉支架随机临床试验的 10 年结果。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Jul 14;76(2):146-158. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.026.
3
Impact of Coronary Atherosclerosis on Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Resorption and Vessel Wall Integration.冠状动脉粥样硬化对生物可吸收血管支架吸收及血管壁整合的影响
JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2020 Jun 3;5(6):619-629. doi: 10.1016/j.jacbts.2020.04.005. eCollection 2020 Jun.
4
Randomized Comparison Between Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold and Metallic Stent: Multimodality Imaging Through 3 Years.随机比较依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架与金属支架:3 年多模态成像。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan 13;13(1):116-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.047.
5
Time-Varying Outcomes With the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold During 5-Year Follow-up: A Systematic Meta-analysis and Individual Patient Data Pooled Study.5 年随访期间 Absorb 生物可吸收血管支架的时变结果:系统评价和个体患者数据合并研究。
JAMA Cardiol. 2019 Dec 1;4(12):1261-1269. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.4101.
6
Clinical Outcomes Before and After Complete Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Resorption: Five-Year Follow-Up From the ABSORB III Trial.完全降解依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架吸收前后的临床结果:ABSORB III 试验 5 年随访。
Circulation. 2019 Dec 3;140(23):1895-1903. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.042584. Epub 2019 Sep 25.
7
Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent in routine PCI: three-year clinical outcomes from the AIDA trial.依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架与依维莫司洗脱金属支架在常规经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的比较:AIDA试验的三年临床结果
EuroIntervention. 2019 Sep 20;15(7):603-606. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00325.
8
Fully bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: lessons learned and future directions.完全生物可吸收血管支架:经验教训与未来方向。
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2019 May;16(5):286-304. doi: 10.1038/s41569-018-0124-7.
9
Complete two-year follow-up with formal non-inferiority testing on primary outcomes of the AIDA trial comparing the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold with the XIENCE drug-eluting metallic stent in routine PCI.对 AIDA 试验的主要结局进行为期两年的随访,并进行正式的非劣效性检验,该试验比较了在常规 PCI 中使用 Absorb 生物可吸收支架与 XIENCE 药物洗脱金属支架。
EuroIntervention. 2018 Jul 20;14(4):e426-e433. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00335.
10
Implantation techniques (predilatation, sizing, and post-dilatation) and the incidence of scaffold thrombosis and revascularisation in lesions treated with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: insights from the AIDA trial.载有依维莫司的生物可吸收血管支架治疗病变时的植入技术(预扩张、定径和后扩张)以及支架血栓和再血管化发生率:来自 AIDA 试验的结果。
EuroIntervention. 2018 Jul 20;14(4):e434-e442. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-17-01152.

依维莫司洗脱生物可吸收支架与依维莫司洗脱支架的长期临床结果:AIDA 随机临床试验的最终 5 年结果。

Long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting stents: final five-year results of the AIDA randomised clinical trial.

机构信息

Amsterdam UMC, Heart Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Department of Cardiology, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands.

出版信息

EuroIntervention. 2022 Mar 18;17(16):1340-1347. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00419.

DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00419
PMID:34483094
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9743247/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS)-related events have been reported between 1 and 3 years - the period of active scaffold bioresorption. Data on the performance of the Absorb BVS in daily clinical practice beyond this time point are scarce.

AIMS

This report aimed to provide the final five-year clinical follow-up of the Absorb BVS in comparison with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES). In addition, we evaluated the effect of prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) administration on events in the scaffold group.

METHODS

AIDA was a multicentre, investigator-initiated, non-inferiority trial, in which 1,845 unselected patients with coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to either the Absorb BVS (n=924) or the XIENCE EES (n=921). Target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularisation, was the primary endpoint. Scaffold thrombosis cases were matched with controls and tested for the effect of prolonged DAPT.

RESULTS

Up to five-year follow-up, there was no difference in TVF between the Absorb BVS (17.7%) and the XIENCE EES (16.1%) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-1.41; p=0.302). Definite or probable device thrombosis (DT) occurred in 43 patients (4.8%) in the scaffold group compared to 13 patients (1.5%) in the stent group (HR 3.32, 95% CI: 1.78-6.17; p<0.001). DT between 3 and 4 years occurred six times in the Absorb arm versus three times in the XIENCE arm. Between 4 and 5 years, the incidence was three versus two, respectively. Of those three DT in the scaffold group, two occurred in XIENCE EES-treated lesions. The odds ratio of scaffold thrombosis in patients on DAPT compared to off DAPT throughout five-year follow-up was 0.36 (95% CI: 0.15-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

The excess risk of the Absorb BVS on late adverse events, in particular device thrombosis, in routine PCI continues up to 4 years and seems to plateau afterwards. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01858077.

摘要

背景

生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)相关事件在 1 至 3 年内报告 - 这是支架生物吸收的活跃时期。在此时间点之后,关于 Absorb BVS 在日常临床实践中的表现的数据很少。

目的

本报告旨在提供 Absorb BVS 的最终五年临床随访结果,与 XIENCE 依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)进行比较。此外,我们评估了延长双联抗血小板治疗(DAPT)对支架组事件的影响。

方法

AIDA 是一项多中心、研究者发起的、非劣效性试验,共纳入 1845 名未经选择的冠心病患者,随机分配至 Absorb BVS(n=924)或 XIENCE EES(n=921)组。主要终点为靶血管失败(TVF),包括心脏死亡、靶血管心肌梗死或靶血管血运重建的复合终点。支架血栓病例与对照组相匹配,并进行了延长 DAPT 的效果检测。

结果

在长达五年的随访中,Absorb BVS(17.7%)与 XIENCE EES(16.1%)组之间 TVF 无差异(风险比[HR]1.31,95%置信区间[CI]:0.90-1.41;p=0.302)。支架组有 43 例(4.8%)发生明确或可能的器械血栓(DT),而支架组有 13 例(1.5%)(HR 3.32,95%CI:1.78-6.17;p<0.001)。Absorb 组在 3 至 4 年期间发生 6 次 DT,在 XIENCE 组发生 3 次。在 4 至 5 年期间,发病率分别为 3 次和 2 次。支架组的 3 例 DT 中,有 2 例发生在 XIENCE EES 治疗的病变中。在整个五年随访期间,DAPT 组支架血栓的优势比为 0.36(95%CI:0.15-0.86)。

结论

在常规 PCI 中,Absorb BVS 晚期不良事件(尤其是器械血栓)的风险持续增加,直至 4 年,此后似乎趋于稳定。

临床试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT01858077。