Back to Search Start Over

'Full-plastic jacket' with everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: Clinical outcomes in the multicenter prospective RAI registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02298413)

Authors :
Gabriele Gabrielli
Paolo Calabrò
Leonardo Misuraca
all Rai investigators
Donatella Corrado
Giuseppe Tarantini
Francesco Pisano
Alessandro Colombo
Bernardo Cortese
Annamaria Nicolino
Gabriele Tumminello
Giuseppe Steffenino
Giulia Masiero
Pietro Mazzarotto
Bruno Loi
Attilio Varricchio
Paola Tellaroli
Roberto Gistri
Marco Mojoli
Alessandro Durante
Luciano Moretti
Luca Nai Fovino
Zoran Olivari
Tarantini, Giuseppe
Masiero, Giulia
Fovino, Luca Nai
Mojoli, Marco
Varricchio, Attilio
Loi, Bruno
Gistri, Roberto
Misuraca, Leonardo
Gabrielli, Gabriele
Cortese, Bernardo
Pisano, Francesco
Moretti, Luciano
Tumminello, Gabriele
Olivari, Zoran
Mazzarotto, Pietro
Colombo, Alessandro
Calabrò, Paolo
Nicolino, Annamaria
Tellaroli, Paola
Corrado, Donatella
Durante, Alessandro
Steffenino, Giuseppe
Publication Year :
2018
Publisher :
Elsevier Ireland Ltd, 2018.

Abstract

Objectives The objective of this study was to investigate mid-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with ‘full-plastic jacket’ (FPJ) everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BRS) implantation. Background FPJ with BRS may represent an interesting option for patient with diffuse coronary artery disease (CAD), but data on the clinical impact of FPJ using the Absorb BRS are scant. Methods FPJ was defined as the implantation of >56 mm of overlapping BRS in at least one vessel. We compared outcomes of patients receiving Absorb FPJ vs. non-FPJ within the multicenter prospective RAI Registry. Results Out of 1505 consecutive patients enrolled in the RAI registry, 1384 were eligible for this analysis. Of these, 143 (10.3%) were treated with BRS FPJ. At a median follow-up of 649 days, no differences were observed between FPJ and non-FPJ groups in terms of the device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE) (5.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.675) or the patient-related composite endpoint (PoCE) (20.9% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.149). Patients receiving FPJ had higher rates of target vessel repeat revascularization (TVR) (11.2% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.042). In the FPJ group, there was no cardiac death and only one (very late) stent thrombosis (ST) (0.7%). Conclusions Mid-term outcomes of a FPJ PCI strategy in the setting of diffuse CAD did not show a significant increase in composite device- and patient-related events, with rates of cardiac death and ST comparable to non-FPJ Absorb BRS implantation. However, these findings are hypothesis generating and requiring further validation.

Details

Language :
English
Database :
OpenAIRE
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....0941f56bbbb98d11850fe84426926122