TY - JOUR
T1 - One-year head to head comparison of the neointimal response between sirolimus eluting stent with reservoir technology and everolimus eluting stent
T2 - An optical coherence tomography study
AU - Shiratori, Yoshitaka
AU - Brugaletta, Salvatore
AU - Alvarez-Contreras, Luis
AU - Azpeitia, Yajaziel
AU - Ospino, Nestor
AU - Gaido, Sebastian
AU - Delahanty, Anuar
AU - Santos, Alejandro
AU - Martin-Yuste, Victoria
AU - Masotti, Monica
AU - Serruys, Patrick W.
AU - Windecker, Stephan
AU - Sabaté, Manel
PY - 2013/10/1
Y1 - 2013/10/1
N2 - Objective to compare the vascular healing process between the sirolimus-eluting NEVO and the everolimus-eluting Xience stent by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1-year follow-up. Background Presence of durable polymer on a drug-eluting metallic stent may be the basis of an inflammatory reaction with abnormal healing response. The NEVO stent, having a bioresorbable polymer eluted by reservoir technology, may overcome this problem. Methods All consecutive patients, who received NEVO or Xience stent implantation between September 2010 and October 2010 in our institution, were included. Vascular healing was assessed at 1-year as percentage of uncovered struts, neointimal thickness (NIT), in-stent/stent area obstruction and pattern of neointima. Results A total 47 patients (2:1 randomization, n = 32 NEVO, n = 15 Xience) were included. Eighteen patients underwent angiographic follow-up (eight patients with nine lesions for NEVO vs. 10 patients with 11 lesions for Xience). The angiographic late loss was numerically higher but not statistically different in NEVO compared with Xience treated lesions (0.38 ± 0.47 mm vs. 0.18 ± 0.27 mm; P = 0.171). OCT analysis of 4,912 struts demonstrated similar rates of uncovered struts (0.5 vs. 0.7%, P = 0.462), higher mean NIT (177.76 ± 87.76 μm vs. 132.22 ± 30.91 μm; P = 0.170) and in stent/stent area obstruction (23.02 ± 14.74% vs. 14.17 ± 5.94%, P = 0.120) in the NEVO as compared with Xience. Conclusion The NEVO stent with a reservoir technology seems to exhibit more neointimal proliferation as compared to Xience stent. The findings of our study, which currently represent the unique data existing on this reservoir technology, would need to be confirmed in a large population.
AB - Objective to compare the vascular healing process between the sirolimus-eluting NEVO and the everolimus-eluting Xience stent by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1-year follow-up. Background Presence of durable polymer on a drug-eluting metallic stent may be the basis of an inflammatory reaction with abnormal healing response. The NEVO stent, having a bioresorbable polymer eluted by reservoir technology, may overcome this problem. Methods All consecutive patients, who received NEVO or Xience stent implantation between September 2010 and October 2010 in our institution, were included. Vascular healing was assessed at 1-year as percentage of uncovered struts, neointimal thickness (NIT), in-stent/stent area obstruction and pattern of neointima. Results A total 47 patients (2:1 randomization, n = 32 NEVO, n = 15 Xience) were included. Eighteen patients underwent angiographic follow-up (eight patients with nine lesions for NEVO vs. 10 patients with 11 lesions for Xience). The angiographic late loss was numerically higher but not statistically different in NEVO compared with Xience treated lesions (0.38 ± 0.47 mm vs. 0.18 ± 0.27 mm; P = 0.171). OCT analysis of 4,912 struts demonstrated similar rates of uncovered struts (0.5 vs. 0.7%, P = 0.462), higher mean NIT (177.76 ± 87.76 μm vs. 132.22 ± 30.91 μm; P = 0.170) and in stent/stent area obstruction (23.02 ± 14.74% vs. 14.17 ± 5.94%, P = 0.120) in the NEVO as compared with Xience. Conclusion The NEVO stent with a reservoir technology seems to exhibit more neointimal proliferation as compared to Xience stent. The findings of our study, which currently represent the unique data existing on this reservoir technology, would need to be confirmed in a large population.
KW - neointima thickness
KW - NEVO
KW - OCT
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885019119&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ccd.24897
DO - 10.1002/ccd.24897
M3 - Article
C2 - 23441068
AN - SCOPUS:84885019119
SN - 1522-1946
VL - 82
SP - E428-E436
JO - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
JF - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
IS - 4
ER -