Author
Listed:
- Cordula M Felix
- Victor J van den Berg
- Sanne E Hoeks
- Jiang Ming Fam
- Mattie Lenzen
- Eric Boersma
- Peter C Smits
- Patrick W Serruys
- Yoshinobu Onuma
- Robert Jan M van Geuns
Abstract
Background: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds (BVS) were introduced to overcome some of the limitations of drug-eluting stent (DES) for PCI. Data regarding the clinical outcomes of the BVS versus DES beyond 2 years are emerging. Objective: To study mid-term outcomes. Methods: We searched online databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, CENTRAL), several websites, meeting presentations and scientific session abstracts until August 8th, 2017 for studies comparing Absorb BVS with second-generation DES. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and definite/probable device thrombosis. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived using a random effects model. Results: Ten studies, seven randomized controlled trials and three propensity-matched observational studies, with a total of 7320 patients (BVS n = 4007; DES n = 3313) and a median follow-up duration of 30.5 months, were included. Risk of TLF was increased for BVS-treated patients (OR 1.34 [95% CI: 1.12–1.60], p = 0.001, I2 = 0%). This was also the case for all myocardial infarction (1.58 [95% CI: 1.27–1.96], p 1 year) device thrombosis was 6.10 [95% CI: 1.40–26.65], p = 0.02). Conclusion: At mid-term follow-up, BVS was associated with an increased risk of TLF, MI, TLR and definite/probable device thrombosis, but this did not result in an increased risk of all-cause mortality.
Suggested Citation
Cordula M Felix & Victor J van den Berg & Sanne E Hoeks & Jiang Ming Fam & Mattie Lenzen & Eric Boersma & Peter C Smits & Patrick W Serruys & Yoshinobu Onuma & Robert Jan M van Geuns, 2018.
"Mid-term outcomes of the Absorb BVS versus second-generation DES: A systematic review and meta-analysis,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0197119
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197119
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0197119. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.