Author + information
- Zhu Jianbing and
- Junbo Ge
A network meta-analysis was performed comparing the efficacy and safety of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) versus drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
This study included 2,925 patients from 8 randomized, controlled trials(RCT) comparing the efficacy and safety of patients after PCI with BVS versus DES placement. We examined myocardial infarction (MI) as primary endpoints. Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) including target lesion revascularization (TLR), cardiovascular death and definite/probable ST were evaluated as secondary endpoints.
Compared with DES, BVS had a high risk of MI (OR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.25 to 2.98) and in-stent restenosis (ISR) (OR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.25 to 3.70). There was a decreased MACEs including target lesion revascularization (TLR), cardiovascular death and definite/probable ST with a BVS (OR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.05,) compared with DES.
BVS for treatment in patients with PCI is associated with high risk of MI and ISR compared with DES.