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 -