Logo Logo
Help
Contact
Switch Language to German
Ortega-Paz, Luis; Capodanno, Davide; Giacchi, Giuseppe; Gori, Tommaso; Nef, Holger; Latib, Azeem; Caramanno, Giuseppe; Mario, Carlo di; Naber, Christoph; Lesiak, Maciej; Capranzano, Piera; Wiebe, Jens; Mehilli, Julinda; Araszkiewicz, Aleksander; Pyxaras, Stelios; Mattesini, Alessio; Geraci, Salvatore; Naganuma, Toru; Colombo, Antonio; Muenzel, Thomas; Sabate, Manel; Tamburino, Corrado; Brugaletta, Salvatore (2017): Impact of Overlapping on 1-Year Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Implantation in Routine Clinical Practice: Insights from the European Multicenter GHOST-EU Registry. In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular interventions, Vol. 89, No. 5: pp. 812-818
Full text not available from 'Open Access LMU'.

Abstract

BackgroundOverlapping implantation of bioresorbable scaffolds (BRSs) are frequent in long coronary lesions. Its impact on clinical outcomes is unknown. Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with overlapping BRS with those patients treated with no-overlap BRS. Methods: We analyzed the 1-year clinical outcomes of 1,477 patients treated with BRS in the GHOST-EU registry, according to the implantation of overlapping BRS. Primary endpoint was patient oriented composite endpoint (PoCE) of: all-cause death, any myocardial infarction (MI) and any repeated revascularization. Scaffold thrombosis, according to Academic Research Consortium definition, was also analyzed. Results: A total of 320 (21.7%) patients were treated with overlapping BRS (overlap group), whereas the remaining 1,157 (78.3%) received no-overlap BRS (no-overlap group). The overlap group had significantly higher frequency of male sex, diabetes mellitus, stable angina, B2/C lesion type, SYNTAX score >= 22, lesion length >34 mm, use of intracoronary imaging guidance, pre- and postdilatation. At 1-year, there were no differences in PoCE between the overlap versus no-overlap group (18.4% vs. 18.2%;HR 1.07, [0.80-1.44];P=0.636), even after adjustment (HR 1.05, [0.48-2.20];P=0.904). Scaffold thrombosis rate did not differ either at one-month (1.3% vs. 1.5%, P=0.769) or at 1-year (1.9% vs. 2.1%, P=0.823). Conclusions: In Real-world" clinical practice, overlapping BRS does not appear to have an impact on clinical outcomes as compared to no-overlapping BRS. These preliminary data should be confirmed. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.