Direct Absorb bioresorbable scaffold implantation in acute coronary syndrome

2Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Direct stent implantation is a preferred technique for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). For the deployment of a bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS), the current guidelines recommend aggressive predilatation. Data about direct BVS implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are scarce. Aim: We sought to assess procedural characteristics and immediate outcomes of direct Absorb BVS implantation in ACS patients. Methods: A total of 91 patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) requiring urgent coronary revascularisation were enrolled. Among them, 50 patients underwent an attempt of direct Absorb implantation. The control group consisted of 41 patients treated with PCI with BVS deployment after elective predilatation. Results: In the direct group BVS deployment was successful in 91% of lesions, and in the remaining 9% of lesions direct implantation failed. In the control group scaffolds were successfully deployed after predilatation in 98% of lesions. In one case Absorb implantation failed even after balloon angioplasty. Type C lesions with severe tortuosity and angulation > 90° were associated with failure in direct Absorb deployment. Quantitative coronary analysis showed similar final percentages of diameter stenosis in the study and control groups. Flow analyses did not show significant differences between both methods. During hospitalisation no recurrent MI, scaffold thrombosis, or target lesion revascularisation was reported in either group. Conclusions: Direct Absorb implantation in ACS patients may be feasible in a suitable lesion anatomy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rzeszutko, L., Wȩgiel, M., Kleczyński, P., Zasada, W., Depukat, R., Rakowski, T., … Bartu, S. (2018). Direct Absorb bioresorbable scaffold implantation in acute coronary syndrome. Kardiologia Polska, 76(10), 1434–1440. https://doi.org/10.5603/KP.a2018.0147

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free