Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus second generation drug-eluting stents for percutaneous treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions: Technical and procedural outcomes from the GHOST-CTO registry.

Abstract

We aimed at comparing the acute performance of bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) for the treatment of chronic total occlusions (CTO). There is a lack of knowledge regarding the use of BRS in CTO. Key outcomes of interest were technical and procedural success. Technical success was defined as successful stent delivery and implantation, postprocedural residual diameter stenosis <30% within the treated segment, and restoration of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow. Procedural success was defined as technical success with no in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Between May 2013 and May 2014, 32 patients underwent CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the Absorb BRS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) and were compared with a historical control group of 54 patients who had undergone CTO PCI with second-generation DES. Baseline characteristics were similar between the BRS and DES groups, with the exception of a larger mean reference vessel diameter in the BRS group (2.92±0.34 vs 2.50±0.68; P<0.001). Technical success was less likely to be achieved in the BRS group compared with the DES group (78.1% vs 96.3%, P=0.012). Procedural success rates were 78.1% and 94.4% in the BRS and DES group, respectively (P = 0.035). Compared with second-generation DES for PCI of CTO lesions, BRS were associated with lower rates of technical and procedural success. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.