Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Comparative assessment of “plaque/media” change on three modalities of IVUS immediately after implantation of either everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold or everolimus-eluting metallic stent in Absorb II study

  • On behalf of the investigators of Absorb II study
  • Erasmus MC
  • Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University
  • Academic Medical Center
  • Cardialysis BV
  • Centre Cardiologique du Nord St Denis
  • Universitätsklinik der Ruhr-Universität Bochum
  • Albert Ludwigs University
  • Magna Graecia University
  • University of Bologna
  • AO San Camillo Forlanini
  • Institut Jacques Cartier
  • Azienda Ospedaliera Arezzo
  • Hospital Puerta de Hierro
  • Imperial College London

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Articlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of the study to assess the comparability of immediate changes in plaque/media volume (PV) on three modalities of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) after implantation of either bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) or everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in Absorb II Study. The two devices have different device volume and ultrasound backscattering that may interfere with the “plaque/media” assessed by three modalities on IVUS: grayscale, backscattering of radiofrequency and brightness function. In a multicenter randomized controlled trial, 501 patients with stable or unstable angina underwent documentary IVUS pre- and post- implantation. The change in plaque/media volume (PV) was categorized into three groups according to the relative PV change in device segment: PV “increased” >+5% (PVI), PV unchanged ±5% (PVU), and PV decreased <−5% (PVD). The change in PV was re-evaluated three times: after subtraction of theoretical device volume, after analysis of echogenicity based on brightness function. In 449 patients, 483 lesions were analyzed pre- and post-implantation. “PVI” was more frequently observed in BVS (53.8%) than EES group (39.4%), p = 0.006. After subtraction of the theoretical device volume, the frequency of “PVI” decreased in both BVS (36.2%) and EES (32.1%) groups and became comparable (p = 0.581). In addition, the percentage of “PVI” was further reduced in both device groups after correction for either radiofrequency backscattering (BVS 34.4% vs. EES 22.6%) or echogenicity (BVS 25.2% vs. EES 9.7%). PV change in device segment was differently affected by BVS and EES devices implantation due to their differences in device volume and ultrasound backscattering. It implies that the lumen volume was also artifactually affected by the type of device implanted. Comparative IVUS assessment of lumen and plaque/media volume changes following implantation of BVS and EES requires specific methodological adjustment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)441-449
Number of pages9
JournalInternational Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Volume33
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2017
Externally publishedYes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Absorb II
  • Bioresorbable vascular scaffold
  • IVUS
  • Plaque/media volume

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative assessment of “plaque/media” change on three modalities of IVUS immediately after implantation of either everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold or everolimus-eluting metallic stent in Absorb II study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this