Abstract
Aims: Next to patient characteristics, the lack of a standardised approach for bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation is perceived as a potential explanation for the heterogeneous results reported so far. To provide some guidance, we sought to find a consensus on the best practices for BVS implantation and management across a broad array of patient and lesion scenarios. Methods and results: Fourteen European centres with a high volume of BVS procedures combined their efforts in an informal collaboration. To get the most objective snapshot of different practices among the participating centres, a survey with 45 multiple choice questions was prepared and conducted. The results of the survey represented a basis for the technical advice provided in the document, whereas areas of controversy are highlighted. Conclusions: Consensus criteria for patient and lesion selection, BVS implantation and optimisation, use of intravascular imaging guidance, approach to multiple patient and lesion scenarios, and management of complications, were identified.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 45-52 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | EuroIntervention |
Volume | 11 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - May 1 2015 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Bioresorbable vascular scaffold
- Consensus document
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Cite this
Contemporary practice and technical aspects in coronary intervention with bioresorbable scaffolds : A European perspective. / Tamburino, Corrado; Latib, Azeem; Van Geuns, Robert Jan; Sabate, Manel; Mehilli, Julinda; Gori, Tommaso; Achenbach, Stephan; Alvarez, Manuel Pan; Nef, Holger; Lesiak, Maciej; Di Mario, Carlo; Colombo, Antonio; Naber, Christoph K.; Caramanno, Giuseppe; Capranzano, Piera; Brugaletta, Salvatore; Geraci, Salvatore; Araszkiewicz, Aleksander; Mattesini, Alessio; Pyxaras, Stylianos A.; Rzeszutko, Lukasz; Depukat, Rafalo; Diletti, Roberto; Boone, Els; Capodanno, Davide; Dudek, Dariusz.
In: EuroIntervention, Vol. 11, No. 1, 01.05.2015, p. 45-52.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Contemporary practice and technical aspects in coronary intervention with bioresorbable scaffolds
T2 - A European perspective
AU - Tamburino, Corrado
AU - Latib, Azeem
AU - Van Geuns, Robert Jan
AU - Sabate, Manel
AU - Mehilli, Julinda
AU - Gori, Tommaso
AU - Achenbach, Stephan
AU - Alvarez, Manuel Pan
AU - Nef, Holger
AU - Lesiak, Maciej
AU - Di Mario, Carlo
AU - Colombo, Antonio
AU - Naber, Christoph K.
AU - Caramanno, Giuseppe
AU - Capranzano, Piera
AU - Brugaletta, Salvatore
AU - Geraci, Salvatore
AU - Araszkiewicz, Aleksander
AU - Mattesini, Alessio
AU - Pyxaras, Stylianos A.
AU - Rzeszutko, Lukasz
AU - Depukat, Rafalo
AU - Diletti, Roberto
AU - Boone, Els
AU - Capodanno, Davide
AU - Dudek, Dariusz
PY - 2015/5/1
Y1 - 2015/5/1
N2 - Aims: Next to patient characteristics, the lack of a standardised approach for bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation is perceived as a potential explanation for the heterogeneous results reported so far. To provide some guidance, we sought to find a consensus on the best practices for BVS implantation and management across a broad array of patient and lesion scenarios. Methods and results: Fourteen European centres with a high volume of BVS procedures combined their efforts in an informal collaboration. To get the most objective snapshot of different practices among the participating centres, a survey with 45 multiple choice questions was prepared and conducted. The results of the survey represented a basis for the technical advice provided in the document, whereas areas of controversy are highlighted. Conclusions: Consensus criteria for patient and lesion selection, BVS implantation and optimisation, use of intravascular imaging guidance, approach to multiple patient and lesion scenarios, and management of complications, were identified.
AB - Aims: Next to patient characteristics, the lack of a standardised approach for bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation is perceived as a potential explanation for the heterogeneous results reported so far. To provide some guidance, we sought to find a consensus on the best practices for BVS implantation and management across a broad array of patient and lesion scenarios. Methods and results: Fourteen European centres with a high volume of BVS procedures combined their efforts in an informal collaboration. To get the most objective snapshot of different practices among the participating centres, a survey with 45 multiple choice questions was prepared and conducted. The results of the survey represented a basis for the technical advice provided in the document, whereas areas of controversy are highlighted. Conclusions: Consensus criteria for patient and lesion selection, BVS implantation and optimisation, use of intravascular imaging guidance, approach to multiple patient and lesion scenarios, and management of complications, were identified.
KW - Bioresorbable vascular scaffold
KW - Consensus document
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929804338&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929804338&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4244/EIJY15M01-05
DO - 10.4244/EIJY15M01-05
M3 - Article
VL - 11
SP - 45
EP - 52
JO - EuroIntervention
JF - EuroIntervention
SN - 1774-024X
IS - 1
ER -