- Email: [email protected]
ANALYSIS OF OUTCOMES FOR BIORESORBABLE VASCULAR SCAFFOLD USE FOR THE TREATMENT OF PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
1009 JACC March 21, 2017 Volume 69, Issue 11
Interventional Cardiology ANALYSIS OF OUTCOMES FOR BIORESORBABLE VASCULAR SCAFFOLD USE FOR THE TREATMENT OF PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Poster Contributions Poster Hall, Hall C Friday, March 17, 2017, 10:00 a.m.-10:45 a.m. Session Title: Head to Toe: Outcomes of Endovascular Interventions Abstract Category: 18. Interventional Cardiology: Carotid and Endovascular Intervention Presentation Number: 1112-129 Authors: Mohammad Ansari, Daniel Garcia, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA, Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute, New Orleans, LA, USA
Introduction: Endovascular treatment for peripheral vascular disease (PAD) includes the use of balloon angioplasty and provisional stent implantation for stabilization of the vessel wall and prevention of re-occlusion. Novel stents made of bioresobable vascular scaffold (BVS) are currently approved for coronary use. We investigated BVS use for the treatment of symptomatic PAD.
Methods: We performed a systematic search through Pub Med and Chochrane database using all clinical data that reported outcomes of BVS use for the treatment of femoropopliteal disease and infra-popliteal disease. Primary endpoints included target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), primary and secondary patency. Secondary outcomes included binary restenosis, scaffold thrombosis, amputation and mortality. Results: A total of 6 studies were included in the analysis a provided 233 patients (142 in the femoropopliteal group and 91 in the infrapopliteal group). Mean follow up in the femoropopliteal group was 12 months. Remedy, Spirit BVS and Igaki –Tamal were the BVS used. Primary patency rate was 51%, secondary patency was 86 %, TLR was 31% and TVR 25%. There was 34% of binary restenosis, 2 % of both amputation and mortality and 6% of scaffold thrombosis.
The mean follow up in the infra-popliteal group was 4 months. Biotronic and Absorb were the BVS used. Primary patency was 87%, secondary 100%, TLR 14% of and TVR 23%. Binary restenosis was 5%, amputation and mortality was 1% each. Scaffold thrombosis was 8%. Conclusions: Our study suggests that BVS might be safe and efficacious for the endovascular treatment of symptomatic PAD. Scaffold thrombosis rate were very low. An in-depth analysis including RCT’s is necessary to determine the clinical application of this modality compared to the current standard therapy.
Interventional Cardiology ANALYSIS OF OUTCOMES FOR BIORESORBABLE VASCULAR SCAFFOLD USE FOR THE TREATMENT OF PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Poster Contributions Poster Hall, Hall C Friday, March 17, 2017, 10:00 a.m.-10:45 a.m. Session Title: Head to Toe: Outcomes of Endovascular Interventions Abstract Category: 18. Interventional Cardiology: Carotid and Endovascular Intervention Presentation Number: 1112-129 Authors: Mohammad Ansari, Daniel Garcia, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA, Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute, New Orleans, LA, USA
Introduction: Endovascular treatment for peripheral vascular disease (PAD) includes the use of balloon angioplasty and provisional stent implantation for stabilization of the vessel wall and prevention of re-occlusion. Novel stents made of bioresobable vascular scaffold (BVS) are currently approved for coronary use. We investigated BVS use for the treatment of symptomatic PAD.
Methods: We performed a systematic search through Pub Med and Chochrane database using all clinical data that reported outcomes of BVS use for the treatment of femoropopliteal disease and infra-popliteal disease. Primary endpoints included target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), primary and secondary patency. Secondary outcomes included binary restenosis, scaffold thrombosis, amputation and mortality. Results: A total of 6 studies were included in the analysis a provided 233 patients (142 in the femoropopliteal group and 91 in the infrapopliteal group). Mean follow up in the femoropopliteal group was 12 months. Remedy, Spirit BVS and Igaki –Tamal were the BVS used. Primary patency rate was 51%, secondary patency was 86 %, TLR was 31% and TVR 25%. There was 34% of binary restenosis, 2 % of both amputation and mortality and 6% of scaffold thrombosis.
The mean follow up in the infra-popliteal group was 4 months. Biotronic and Absorb were the BVS used. Primary patency was 87%, secondary 100%, TLR 14% of and TVR 23%. Binary restenosis was 5%, amputation and mortality was 1% each. Scaffold thrombosis was 8%. Conclusions: Our study suggests that BVS might be safe and efficacious for the endovascular treatment of symptomatic PAD. Scaffold thrombosis rate were very low. An in-depth analysis including RCT’s is necessary to determine the clinical application of this modality compared to the current standard therapy.