Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes After Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes
Section snippets
Methods
This study was designed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.14 A comprehensive MEDLINE, COCHRANE, ISI Web of Sciences, and SCOPUS search was conducted until November 15, 2017, using the following medical subject headings alone and in different combinations: “bioresorbable stent(s)”, “Absorb stent(s)”, “Everolimus-eluting stent(s)”, “acute coronary syndromes”, and “acute myocardial infarction”. Reference lists from all eligible studies
Results
Figure 1 shows the flow diagram of the study selection process. Six studied enrolling 2,318 patients with ACS who underwent PCI with either everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (n = 1022) or everolimus-eluting metallic stents (n = 1296) implantation were included. Design and characteristics of the included studies are reported in Table 1. One randomized trial15 and 5 observational studies16, 17, 18, 19, 20 were included. When studies reported results from both unmatched and
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis specifically investigating the efficacy and safety of everolimus-eluting BRS versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients presenting with ACS. In line to what observed from clinical studies and meta-analyses performed on patients who underwent routine PCI, our results confirmed in the ACS setting a higher risk of device-failure in patients treated with BRS and support the pivotal role of device thrombosis in determining the
Disclosures
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
References (30)
- et al.
5-year results of a randomized comparison of XIENCE V everolimus-eluting and TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stents: final results from the SPIRIT III trial (clinical evaluation of the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions)
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
(2013) - et al.
Long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
Atherosclerosis
(2011) - et al.
A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1-year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial
Lancet
(2015) - et al.
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus metallic stents in patients with coronary artery disease: ABSORB China trial
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2015) - et al.
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
Lancet
(2016) - et al.
Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Lancet
(2016) - et al.
2-year outcomes with the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold for treatment of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of seven randomised trials with an individual patient data substudy
Lancet
(2017) - et al.
Clinical comparison with short-term follow-up of bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus everolimus-eluting stent in primary percutaneous coronary interventions
Am J Cardiol
(2015) - et al.
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)
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
(2015) - et al.
Very late thrombosis after bioresorbable scaffolds: cause for concern?
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2015)
Bioresorbable coronary scaffold thrombosis: multicenter comprehensive analysis of clinical presentation, mechanisms, and predictors
J Am Coll Cardiol
A prospective evaluation of a pre-specified absorb BVS implantation strategy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: The BVS STEMI STRATEGY-IT study
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
Benefits and risks of extended dual antiplatelet therapy after everolimus-eluting stents
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
Impact of gene polymorphisms, platelet reactivity, and the SYNTAX score on 1-year clinical outcomes in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the GEPRESS study
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: more different than alike?
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
Cited by (0)
See page 67 for disclosure information.