» Articles » PMID: 17503509

Comparison of in Vivo Acute Stent Recoil Between the Bioabsorbable Everolimus-eluting Coronary Stent and the Everolimus-eluting Cobalt Chromium Coronary Stent: Insights from the ABSORB and SPIRIT Trials

Overview
Date 2007 May 16
PMID 17503509
Citations 29
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate and compare in vivo acute stent recoil of a novel bioabsorbable stent and a metallic stent.

Background: The bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent (BVS) is composed of a poly-L-lactic acid backbone, coated with a bioabsorbable polymer containing the antiproliferative drug, everolimus, and expected to be totally metabolized and absorbed in the human body. Because the BVS is made from polymer, it may have more acute recoil than metallic stents in vivo.

Methods: A total of 54 patients, who underwent elective stent implantation for single de novo native coronary artery lesions, were enrolled: 27 patients treated with the BVS and 27 patients treated with the everolimus-eluting cobalt chromium stent (EES). Acute absolute recoil, assessed by quantitative coronary angiography, was defined as the difference between mean diameter of the last inflated balloon at the highest pressure (X) and mean lumen diameter of the stent immediately after the last balloon deflation (Y). Acute percent recoil was defined as (X - Y)/X and expressed as a percentage.

Results: Acute absolute recoil of the BVS and EES was 0.20 +/- 0.21 mm and 0.13 +/- 0.21 mm, respectively (P = 0.32). Acute percent recoil was 6.9% +/- 7.0% in the BVS group and 4.3% +/- 7.1% in the EES group (P = 0.25).

Conclusions: In vivo acute stent recoil of the BVS is slightly larger but insignificantly different from that of the EES, implying that the BVS may have good radial strength similar to the metallic stent.

Citing Articles

Safety and efficacy of a novel 3D-printed bioresorbable sirolimus-eluting scaffold in a porcine model.

Shi Q, Zhang B, Wang X, Fei J, Qin Q, Zheng B AsiaIntervention. 2023; 9(2):133-142.

PMID: 37736208 PMC: 10507451. DOI: 10.4244/AIJ-D-22-00051.


Bioresorbable scaffold technology: The yet unfulfilled promise of becoming the workhorse stent in the cardiac catherization laboratory.

Elabbassi W, Chowdhury M, Hatala R Egypt Heart J. 2018; 70(4):409-414.

PMID: 30591764 PMC: 6303354. DOI: 10.1016/j.ehj.2018.07.004.


Undesired Outcomes of the Catania Stent Compared to the Xience Stent in Patients Undergoing Angioplasty: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

Pourmoghaddas M, Rohani H, Sanei H, Amirpour A Adv Biomed Res. 2017; 6:154.

PMID: 29285484 PMC: 5735554. DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.219419.


Emerging Technologies in Flow Diverters and Stents for Cerebrovascular Diseases.

Karsy M, Guan J, Brock A, Amin A, Park M Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2017; 17(12):96.

PMID: 29081013 DOI: 10.1007/s11910-017-0805-3.


Conformability in everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffolds compared with metal platform coronary stents in long lesions.

Fam J, Ishibashi Y, Felix C, Zhang B, Diletti R, van Mieghem N Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017; 33(12):1863-1871.

PMID: 28685314 PMC: 5698382. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-017-1193-0.