Evaluation of myocardial blood flow and coronary flow reserve after implantation of a bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus metal drug-eluting stent: an interim one-month analysis of the VANISH trial.

Abstract

A randomised clinical trial of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) vs. metal drug-eluting stent (DES) was initiated, using positron emission tomography (PET) perfusion imaging to assess the effects of both treatments on (hyperaemic) myocardial blood flow (MBF) and coronary flow reserve (CFR) over a three-year period (VANISH trial). In the present study, early, i.e., after one month, MBF and CFR are reported. Sixty patients (45 men [75%], 55±7 years) with a documented single-vessel type A or B1 lesion were included in this single-blind randomised clinical trial. Patients were randomised to implantation of a BVS or DES in a one-to-one fashion. Approximately one month after percutaneous coronary intervention, patients underwent [15O]H2O PET to assess (hyperaemic) MBF, cold pressor test MBF, and CFR. One patient refused PET perfusion at one-month follow-up (in the DES arm). MBF of the treated myocardial territory during rest, CPT, and hyperaemia were not different in BVS-treated patients as compared to DES-treated patients (1.02±0.28 vs. 0.96±0.24 mL·min-1·g-1, p=0.38, 1.20±0.38 vs. 1.08±0.23 mL·min-1·g-1, p=0.16, and 3.04±0.80 vs. 3.33±0.77 mL·min-1·g-1, p=0.16, respectively). CFR of the treated myocardial territory was significantly lower in the BVS-treated patients (3.09±0.94 vs. 3.57±0.85, p<0.05). No differences in PET-derived absolute myocardial perfusion were observed between BVS-treated patients as compared to DES-treated patients at one-month follow-up. CFR was attenuated in BVS-treated patients, although still within the normal range.