JACC. Cardiovascular interventions · 2014
Scaffold and edge vascular response following implantation of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a 3-year serial optical coherence tomography study.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Yao-Jun, Iqbal Javaid, Nakatani Shimpei, Bourantas Christos V, Campos Carlos M, Ishibashi Yuki, Cho Yun-Kyeong, Veldhof Susan, Wang Jin, Onuma Yoshinobu, Garcia-Garcia Hector M, Dudek Dariusz, van Geuns Robert-Jan, Serruys Patrick W, ABSORB Cohort B Study Investigators
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the in-scaffold vascular response (SVR) and edge vascular response (EVR) after implantation of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) using serial optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging.
BACKGROUND: Although studies using intravascular ultrasound have evaluated the EVR in metal stents and BRSs, there is a lack of OCT-based SVR and EVR assessment after BRS implantation.
METHODS: In the ABSORB Cohort B (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B) study, 23 patients (23 lesions) in Cohort B1 and 17 patients (18 lesions) in Cohort B2 underwent truly serial OCT examinations at 3 different time points (Cohort B1: post-procedure, 6 months, and 2 years; B2: post-procedure, 1 year, and 3 years) after implantation of an 18-mm scaffold. A frame-by-frame OCT analysis was performed at the 5-mm proximal, 5-mm distal edge, and 2-mm in-scaffold margins, whereas the middle 14-mm in-scaffold segment was analyzed at 1-mm intervals.
RESULTS: The in-scaffold mean luminal area significantly decreased from baseline to 6 months or 1 year (7.22 ± 1.24 mm(2) vs. 6.05 ± 1.38 mm(2) and 7.64 ± 1.19 mm(2) vs. 5.72 ± 0.89 mm(2), respectively; both p < 0.01), but remained unchanged from then onward. In Cohort B1, a significant increase in mean luminal area of the distal edge was observed (5.42 ± 1.81 mm(2) vs. 5.58 ± 1.53 mm(2); p < 0.01), whereas the mean luminal area of the proximal edge remained unchanged at 6 months. In Cohort B2, the mean luminal areas of the proximal and distal edges were significantly smaller than post-procedure measurements at 3 years. The mean luminal area loss at both edges was significantly less than the mean luminal area loss of the in-scaffold segment at both 6-month and 2-year follow-up in Cohort B1 or at 1 year and 3 years in Cohort B2.
CONCLUSIONS: This OCT-based serial EVR and SVR evaluation of the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) showed less luminal loss at the edges than luminal loss within the scaffold. The luminal reduction of both edges is not a nosologic entity, but an EVR in continuity with the SVR, extending from the in-scaffold margin to both edges. (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B [ABSORB B]; NCT00856856).
BACKGROUND: Although studies using intravascular ultrasound have evaluated the EVR in metal stents and BRSs, there is a lack of OCT-based SVR and EVR assessment after BRS implantation.
METHODS: In the ABSORB Cohort B (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B) study, 23 patients (23 lesions) in Cohort B1 and 17 patients (18 lesions) in Cohort B2 underwent truly serial OCT examinations at 3 different time points (Cohort B1: post-procedure, 6 months, and 2 years; B2: post-procedure, 1 year, and 3 years) after implantation of an 18-mm scaffold. A frame-by-frame OCT analysis was performed at the 5-mm proximal, 5-mm distal edge, and 2-mm in-scaffold margins, whereas the middle 14-mm in-scaffold segment was analyzed at 1-mm intervals.
RESULTS: The in-scaffold mean luminal area significantly decreased from baseline to 6 months or 1 year (7.22 ± 1.24 mm(2) vs. 6.05 ± 1.38 mm(2) and 7.64 ± 1.19 mm(2) vs. 5.72 ± 0.89 mm(2), respectively; both p < 0.01), but remained unchanged from then onward. In Cohort B1, a significant increase in mean luminal area of the distal edge was observed (5.42 ± 1.81 mm(2) vs. 5.58 ± 1.53 mm(2); p < 0.01), whereas the mean luminal area of the proximal edge remained unchanged at 6 months. In Cohort B2, the mean luminal areas of the proximal and distal edges were significantly smaller than post-procedure measurements at 3 years. The mean luminal area loss at both edges was significantly less than the mean luminal area loss of the in-scaffold segment at both 6-month and 2-year follow-up in Cohort B1 or at 1 year and 3 years in Cohort B2.
CONCLUSIONS: This OCT-based serial EVR and SVR evaluation of the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) showed less luminal loss at the edges than luminal loss within the scaffold. The luminal reduction of both edges is not a nosologic entity, but an EVR in continuity with the SVR, extending from the in-scaffold margin to both edges. (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B [ABSORB B]; NCT00856856).
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Absorbable ImplantsAgedAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCardiovascular AgentsCoated Materials, BiocompatibleCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary RestenosisCoronary ThrombosisCoronary VesselsEverolimusFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProsthesis DesignSirolimusTime FactorsTomography, Optical CoherenceTreatment Outcome