Restenosis patterns after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Angiographic substudy of the GHOST-EU registry

M Baquet, H Nef, T Gori, A Latib, D Capodanno, C Di Mario, M Sabate, A Colombo, C Tamburino, J Mehilli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate pattern of in-BVS-restenosis after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. Background: In-stent restenosis morphology impacts target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates and clinical outcomes. Although several trials report on outcomes after BVS implantation, information about in-BVS restenosis pattern is still lacking. Methods: Between November 2011 and January 2014, in 7 of 10 European centers participating in the GHOST-EU registry, 668 patients underwent BVS implantation. Of them 164 patients (200 lesions) underwent an additional angiogram 3 to 12 months after index PCI. Results: Binary in-BVS restenosis (IBR) (in-segment diameter stenosis ≥50%) was observed in 12.7% (21 of 164) of patients (30 lesions), with a TLR rate of 16.5%. The IBR morphology was classified as focal margin in 50.0%, focal body in 26.7%, multifocal in 10.0%, and diffuse in 13.3% of these cases. Treatment of small vessels (OR 5.49, 95% CI 1.6-18.8, P <0.01) was identified as independent predictor of IBR. Performing predilatation (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-1.04, P = 0.06), high-pressure postdilatation (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.90-11.18, P = 0.07) as well as treatment of acute coronary syndrome (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-1.12, P = 0.07) seem to strongly influence this risk. Conclusions: The IBR morphology is mostly focal involving particularly the BVS margins suggesting association with procedural aspects in this early experience with BVS. Treatment of small vessels is the strongest predictor of higher IBR risk. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)276-282
Number of pages7
JournalCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume92
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Blood Vessels
Registries
Acute Coronary Syndrome
Stents
Angiography
Pathologic Constriction
Therapeutics
Pressure

Cite this

Restenosis patterns after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Angiographic substudy of the GHOST-EU registry. / Baquet, M; Nef, H; Gori, T; Latib, A; Capodanno, D; Di Mario, C; Sabate, M; Colombo, A; Tamburino, C; Mehilli, J.

In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, Vol. 92, No. 2, 2018, p. 276-282.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Baquet, M, Nef, H, Gori, T, Latib, A, Capodanno, D, Di Mario, C, Sabate, M, Colombo, A, Tamburino, C & Mehilli, J 2018, 'Restenosis patterns after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Angiographic substudy of the GHOST-EU registry', Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 276-282. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.27350
Baquet, M ; Nef, H ; Gori, T ; Latib, A ; Capodanno, D ; Di Mario, C ; Sabate, M ; Colombo, A ; Tamburino, C ; Mehilli, J. / Restenosis patterns after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Angiographic substudy of the GHOST-EU registry. In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2018 ; Vol. 92, No. 2. pp. 276-282.
@article{0df9e84cfdfd443d851cd46e97d69846,
title = "Restenosis patterns after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Angiographic substudy of the GHOST-EU registry",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate pattern of in-BVS-restenosis after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. Background: In-stent restenosis morphology impacts target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates and clinical outcomes. Although several trials report on outcomes after BVS implantation, information about in-BVS restenosis pattern is still lacking. Methods: Between November 2011 and January 2014, in 7 of 10 European centers participating in the GHOST-EU registry, 668 patients underwent BVS implantation. Of them 164 patients (200 lesions) underwent an additional angiogram 3 to 12 months after index PCI. Results: Binary in-BVS restenosis (IBR) (in-segment diameter stenosis ≥50{\%}) was observed in 12.7{\%} (21 of 164) of patients (30 lesions), with a TLR rate of 16.5{\%}. The IBR morphology was classified as focal margin in 50.0{\%}, focal body in 26.7{\%}, multifocal in 10.0{\%}, and diffuse in 13.3{\%} of these cases. Treatment of small vessels (OR 5.49, 95{\%} CI 1.6-18.8, P <0.01) was identified as independent predictor of IBR. Performing predilatation (OR 0.13, 95{\%} CI 0.02-1.04, P = 0.06), high-pressure postdilatation (OR 3.16, 95{\%} CI 0.90-11.18, P = 0.07) as well as treatment of acute coronary syndrome (OR 0.18, 95{\%} CI 0.03-1.12, P = 0.07) seem to strongly influence this risk. Conclusions: The IBR morphology is mostly focal involving particularly the BVS margins suggesting association with procedural aspects in this early experience with BVS. Treatment of small vessels is the strongest predictor of higher IBR risk. {\circledC} 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.",
author = "M Baquet and H Nef and T Gori and A Latib and D Capodanno and {Di Mario}, C and M Sabate and A Colombo and C Tamburino and J Mehilli",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1002/ccd.27350",
language = "English",
volume = "92",
pages = "276--282",
journal = "Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1522-1946",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Restenosis patterns after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Angiographic substudy of the GHOST-EU registry

AU - Baquet, M

AU - Nef, H

AU - Gori, T

AU - Latib, A

AU - Capodanno, D

AU - Di Mario, C

AU - Sabate, M

AU - Colombo, A

AU - Tamburino, C

AU - Mehilli, J

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate pattern of in-BVS-restenosis after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. Background: In-stent restenosis morphology impacts target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates and clinical outcomes. Although several trials report on outcomes after BVS implantation, information about in-BVS restenosis pattern is still lacking. Methods: Between November 2011 and January 2014, in 7 of 10 European centers participating in the GHOST-EU registry, 668 patients underwent BVS implantation. Of them 164 patients (200 lesions) underwent an additional angiogram 3 to 12 months after index PCI. Results: Binary in-BVS restenosis (IBR) (in-segment diameter stenosis ≥50%) was observed in 12.7% (21 of 164) of patients (30 lesions), with a TLR rate of 16.5%. The IBR morphology was classified as focal margin in 50.0%, focal body in 26.7%, multifocal in 10.0%, and diffuse in 13.3% of these cases. Treatment of small vessels (OR 5.49, 95% CI 1.6-18.8, P <0.01) was identified as independent predictor of IBR. Performing predilatation (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-1.04, P = 0.06), high-pressure postdilatation (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.90-11.18, P = 0.07) as well as treatment of acute coronary syndrome (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-1.12, P = 0.07) seem to strongly influence this risk. Conclusions: The IBR morphology is mostly focal involving particularly the BVS margins suggesting association with procedural aspects in this early experience with BVS. Treatment of small vessels is the strongest predictor of higher IBR risk. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate pattern of in-BVS-restenosis after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. Background: In-stent restenosis morphology impacts target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates and clinical outcomes. Although several trials report on outcomes after BVS implantation, information about in-BVS restenosis pattern is still lacking. Methods: Between November 2011 and January 2014, in 7 of 10 European centers participating in the GHOST-EU registry, 668 patients underwent BVS implantation. Of them 164 patients (200 lesions) underwent an additional angiogram 3 to 12 months after index PCI. Results: Binary in-BVS restenosis (IBR) (in-segment diameter stenosis ≥50%) was observed in 12.7% (21 of 164) of patients (30 lesions), with a TLR rate of 16.5%. The IBR morphology was classified as focal margin in 50.0%, focal body in 26.7%, multifocal in 10.0%, and diffuse in 13.3% of these cases. Treatment of small vessels (OR 5.49, 95% CI 1.6-18.8, P <0.01) was identified as independent predictor of IBR. Performing predilatation (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-1.04, P = 0.06), high-pressure postdilatation (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.90-11.18, P = 0.07) as well as treatment of acute coronary syndrome (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-1.12, P = 0.07) seem to strongly influence this risk. Conclusions: The IBR morphology is mostly focal involving particularly the BVS margins suggesting association with procedural aspects in this early experience with BVS. Treatment of small vessels is the strongest predictor of higher IBR risk. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

U2 - 10.1002/ccd.27350

DO - 10.1002/ccd.27350

M3 - Article

VL - 92

SP - 276

EP - 282

JO - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1522-1946

IS - 2

ER -