Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Is the Optimal Stent Design Interventionalist’s View

  • Chapter
Controversies in Cardiology

  • 1061 Accesses

Abstract

There are three main components to a coronary stent, and modifications to either the stent platform, stent polymer or drug coating can affect procedural success and influence clinical outcomes. This chapter discusses the pros and cons of modifying these parts of a coronary stent in an attempt to produce the ideal device.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sigwart U, Puel J, Mirkovitch V, Joffre F, Kappenberger L. Intravascular stents to prevent occlusion and restenosis after transluminal angioplasty. N Engl J Med. 1987;316:701–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, Fajadet J, Ban Hayashi E, Perin M, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1773–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nordmann AJ, Briel M, Bucher HC. Mortality in randomized controlled trials comparing drug-eluting vs. bare metal stents in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:2784–814.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Camenzind E, Steg PG, Wijns W. Stent thrombosis late after implantation of first-generation drug-eluting stents: a cause for concern. Circulation. 2007;115:1440–55; discussion 1455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pfisterer M, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Buser PT, Rickenbacher P, Hunziker P, Mueller C, et al. Late clinical events after clopidogrel discontinuation may limit the benefit of drug-eluting stents: an observational study of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:2584–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Stone GW, Moses JW, Ellis SG, Schofer J, Dawkins KD, Morice M-C, et al. Safety and efficacy of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:998–1008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Spaulding C, Daemen J, Boersma E, Cutlip DE, Serruys PW. A pooled analysis of data comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:989–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mauri L, Hsieh WH, Massaro JM, Ho KK, D’Agostino R, Cutlip DE. Stent thrombosis in randomized clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1020–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kirtane AJ, Gupta A, Iyengar S, Moses JW, Leon MB, Applegate R, et al. Safety and efficacy of drug-eluting and bare metal stents: comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies. Circulation. 2009;119:3198–206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stettler C, Wandel S, Allemann S, Kastrati A, Morice MC, Schomig A, et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2007;370:937–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kang SH, Park KW, Kang DY, Lim WH, Park KT, Han JK, et al. Biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents vs. durable-polymer drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and Bayesian approach network meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1147–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bangalore S, Toklu B, Amoroso N, Fusaro M, Kumar S, Hannan EL, et al. Bare metal stents, durable polymer drug eluting stents, and biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents for coronary artery disease: mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;347:f6625.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Valgimigli M, Sabate M, Kaiser C, Brugaletta S, de la Torre Hernandez JM, Galatius S, et al. Effects of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents or bare metal stent on fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events: patient level meta-analysis. BMJ. 2014;349:g6427.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, Mariani A, Sabate M, Smits PC, et al. Clinical outcomes with bioabsorbable polymer- versus durable polymer-based drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:299–307.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sabate M, Raber L, Heg D, Brugaletta S, Kelbaek H, Cequier A, et al. Comparison of newer-generation drug-eluting with bare-metal stents in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pooled analysis of the EXAMINATION (clinical Evaluation of the Xience-V stent in Acute Myocardial INfArcTION) and COMFORTABLE-AMI (Comparison of Biolimus Eluted From an Erodible Stent Coating With Bare Metal Stents in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:55–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, Stettler C, Sangiorgi D, D’Ascenzo F, et al. Stent thrombosis with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;379:1393–402.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morice MC, Urban P, Greene S, Schuler G, Chevalier B. Why are we still using coronary bare-metal stents? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1122–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kaiser C, Galatius S, Jeger R, Gilgen N, Jensen JS, Naber C, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stents: main results of the Basel Stent Kosten-Effektivitats Trial-PROspective Validation Examination II (BASKET-PROVE II), a randomized, controlled noninferiority 2-year outcome trial. Circulation. 2015;131:74–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Garg S, Serruys P. Benefits of and safety concerns associated with drug-eluting coronary stents. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2010;8:449–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. van Werkum JW, Heestermans AA, Zomer AC, Kelder JC, Suttorp MJ, Rensing BJ, et al. Predictors of coronary stent thrombosis: the Dutch Stent Thrombosis Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1399–409.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, Di Mario C, Falk V, Folliguet T, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:2501–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Valgimigli M, Campo G, Monti M, Vranckx P, Percoco G, Tumscitz C, et al. Short- versus long-term duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting: a randomized multicenter trial. Circulation. 2012;125:2015–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim BK, Hong MK, Shin DH, Nam CM, Kim JS, Ko YG, et al. A new strategy for discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy: the RESET Trial (REal Safety and Efficacy of 3-month dual antiplatelet Therapy following Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1340–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Valgimigli M, Patialiakas A, Thury A, McFadden E, Colangelo S, Campo G, et al. Zotarolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents in uncertain drug-eluting stent candidates. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:805–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gilard M, Barragan P, Noryani AA, Noor HA, Majwal T, Hovasse T, et al. 6- versus 24-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents in patients nonresistant to aspirin: the randomized, multicenter ITALIC trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:777–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Schomig A, Dibra A, Windecker S, Mehilli J, Suarez de Lezo J, Kaiser C, et al. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials of sirolimus-eluting stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1373–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Scheller B, Hehrlein C, Bocksch W, Rutsch W, Haghi D, Dietz U, et al. Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2113–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Steigerwald K, Ballke S, Quee SC, Byrne RA, Vorpahl M, Vogeser M, et al. Vascular healing in drug-eluting stents: differential drug-associated response of limus-eluting stents in a preclinical model of stent implantation. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:752–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Joner M, Nakazawa G, Finn AV, Quee SC, Coleman L, Acampado E, et al. Endothelial cell recovery between comparator polymer-based drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:333–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kolandaivelu K, Swaminathan R, Gibson WJ, Kolachalama VB, Nguyen-Ehrenreich KL, Giddings VL, et al. Stent thrombogenicity early in high-risk interventional settings is driven by stent design and deployment and protected by polymer-drug coatings. Circulation. 2011;123:1400–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Joner M, Finn AV, Farb A, Mont EK, Kolodgie FD, Ladich E, et al. Pathology of drug-eluting stents in humans: delayed healing and late thrombotic risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:193–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cook S, Ladich E, Nakazawa G, Eshtehardi P, Neidhart M, Vogel R, et al. Correlation of intravascular ultrasound findings with histopathological analysis of thrombus aspirates in patients with very late drug-eluting stent thrombosis. Circulation. 2009;120:391–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Holmes Jr DR, Kereiakes DJ, Garg S, Serruys PW, Dehmer GJ, Ellis SG, et al. Stent thrombosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1357–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Waksman R, Pakala R. Coating bioabsorption and chronic bare metal scaffolding versus fully bioabsorbable stent. EuroIntervention. 2009;5(Suppl F):F36–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. De Jong WH, Eelco Bergsma J, Robinson JE, Bos RR. Tissue response to partially in vitro predegraded poly-L-lactide implants. Biomaterials. 2005;26:1781–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Windecker S, Serruys PW, Wandel S, Buszman P, Trznadel S, Linke A, et al. Biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer versus sirolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer for coronary revascularisation (LEADERS): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2008;372:1163–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Meredith IT, Verheye S, Dubois CL, Dens J, Fajadet J, Carrie D, et al. Primary endpoint results of the EVOLVE trial: a randomized evaluation of a novel bioabsorbable polymer-coated, everolimus-eluting coronary stent. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1362–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Smits PC, Hofma S, Togni M, Vazquez N, Valdes M, Voudris V, et al. Abluminal biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (COMPARE II): a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2013;381:651–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Christiansen EH, Jensen LO, Thayssen P, Tilsted HH, Krusell LR, Hansen KN, et al. Biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer-coated stent versus durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT V): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2013;381:661–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Natsuaki M, Kozuma K, Morimoto T, Kadota K, Muramatsu T, Nakagawa Y, et al. Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent: a randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:181–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Raungaard B, Jensen LO, Tilsted HH, Christiansen EH, Maeng M, Terkelsen CJ, et al. Zotarolimus-eluting durable-polymer-coated stent versus a biolimus-eluting biodegradable-polymer-coated stent in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT VI): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9977):1527–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Raber L, Kelbaek H, Ostojic M, Baumbach A, Heg D, Tuller D, et al. Effect of biolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer vs bare-metal stents on cardiovascular events among patients with acute myocardial infarction: the COMFORTABLE AMI randomized trial. JAMA. 2012;308:777–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Dani S, Kukreja N, Parikh P, Joshi H, Prajapati J, Jain S, et al. Biodegradable-polymer-based, sirolimus-eluting Supralimus stent: 6-month angiographic and 30-month clinical follow-up results from the series I prospective study. EuroIntervention. 2008;4:59–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Han Y, Jing Q, Xu B, Yang L, Liu H, Shang X, et al. Safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stents in “real-world” practice: 18-month clinical and 9-month angiographic outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2009;2:303–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Firehawk GR. Abluminal groove filled bioabsorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent: Update on the first in man TARGET I and TARGET II studies. Presentation at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, San Francisco, 10th Nov 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ormiston J, Webster M, Stewart J, Vrolix M, Whitbourn R, Donohoe D, et al. First-in-human evaluation of a bioabsorbable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent: imaging and clinical results of the DESSOLVE I Trial (DES with sirolimus and a bioabsorbable polymer for the treatment of patients with de novo lesion in the native coronary arteries). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:1026–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Garg S, Sarno G, Serruys PW, de Vries T, Buszman P, Linke A, et al. The twelve-month outcomes of a biolimus eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer compared with a sirolimus eluting stent with a durable polymer. EuroIntervention. 2010;6:233–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Chevalier B, Silber S, Park S-J, Garcia E, Schuler G, Suryapranata H, et al. Randomized comparison of the Nobori Biolimus A9-eluting coronary stent with the Taxus Liberte paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent in patients with stenosis in native coronary arteries: the NOBORI 1 trial--Phase 2. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:188–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Verheye S, Agostoni P, Dubois CL, Dens J, Ormiston J, Worthley S, et al. 9-month clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound results of a prospective evaluation of the Axxess self-expanding biolimus A9-eluting stent in coronary bifurcation lesions: the DIVERGE (Drug-Eluting Stent Intervention for Treating Side Branches Effectively) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1031–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Haude M, Lee SW, Worthley SG, Silber S, Verheye S, Erbs S, et al. The REMEDEE trial: a randomized comparison of a combination sirolimus-eluting endothelial progenitor cell capture stent with a paclitaxel-eluting stent. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:334–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Verheye S. Overview of novolimus eluting and myolimus elution from durable and bioabsorbable polymers. Presentation at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Interventions, Washington, USA, 22nd Sept 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Schofer J. Multicentre, first-in-man study on the Elixir Myolimus-eluting coronary stent system with bioabsorbable polymer: 12-month clinical and angiographic/IVUS results. Presentation EuroPCR, 25th–28th May 2010, Paris, France. Available [online] http://www.pcronline.com/Lectures/2010/Multicentre-first-in-man-study-on-the-Elixir-Myolimus-eluting-coronary-stent-system-with-bioabsorbable-polymer-12-month-clinical-and-angiographic-IVUS-results. Accessed 29 May 2010.

  53. Webster M, Harding S, McClean D, Jaffe W, Ormiston J, Aitken A, et al. First-in-human evaluation of a sirolimus-eluting coronary stent on an integrated delivery system: the DIRECT study. EuroIntervention. 2013;9:46–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Dani S, Costa RA, Joshi H, Shah J, Pandya R, Virmani R, et al. First-in-human evaluation of the novel BioMime sirolimus-eluting coronary stent with bioabsorbable polymer for the treatment of single de novo lesions located in native coronary vessels - results from the meriT-1 trial. EuroIntervention. 2013;9:493–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hamon M, Niculescu R, Deleanu D, Dorobantu M, Weissman NJ, Waksman R. Clinical and angiographic experience with a third-generation drug-eluting Orsiro stent in the treatment of single de novo coronary artery lesions (BIOFLOW-I): a prospective, first-in-man study. EuroIntervention. 2013;8:1006–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Lemos PA. Inspiron sirolimus eluting stent. Clinical Research Program Update. Presentation at Transcatheter Therapeutics, Miami. Oct 2012. Available http://www.tctmd.com.

  57. Lemos PA, Moulin B, Perin MA, Oliveira LA, Arruda JA, Lima VC, et al. Randomized evaluation of two drug-eluting stents with identical metallic platform and biodegradable polymer but different agents (paclitaxel or sirolimus) compared against bare stents: 1-Year results of the PAINT trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74(5):665–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Vranckx P, Serruys PW, Gambhir S, Sousa E, Abizaid A, Lemos P, et al. Biodegradable-polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting Infinnium stent: 9-Month clinical and angiographic follow-up results from the SIMPLE II prospective multi-centre registry study. EuroIntervention. 2006;2:310–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Koppara T, Joner M, Bayer G, Steigerwald K, Diener T, Wittchow E. Histopathological comparison of biodegradable polymer and permanent polymer based sirolimus eluting stents in a porcine model of coronary stent implantation. Thromb Haemost. 2012;107:1161–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Hamilos M, Sarma J, Ostojic M, Cuisset T, Sarno G, Melikian N, et al. Interference of drug-eluting stents with endothelium-dependent coronary vasomotion: evidence for device-specific responses. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;1:193–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Tada T, Kastrati A, Byrne RA, Schuster T, Cuni R, King LA, et al. Randomized comparison of biolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer versus everolimus-eluting stents with permanent polymer coatings assessed by optical coherence tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;30:495–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Barlis P, Regar E, Serruys PW, Dimopoulos K, van der Giessen WJ, van Geuns RJ, et al. An optical coherence tomography study of a biodegradable vs. durable polymer-coated limus-eluting stent: a LEADERS trial sub-study. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:165–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Serruys PW, Farooq V, Kalesan B, de Vries T, Buszman P, Linke A, et al. Improved Safety and Reduction in Stent Thrombosis Associated With Biodegradable Polymer-Based Biolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer-Based Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Final 5-Year Report of the LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) Randomized Noninferiority Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:777–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Stefanini GG, Byrne RA, Serruys PW, de Waha A, Meier B, Massberg S, et al. Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents reduce the risk of stent thrombosis at 4 years in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from the ISAR-TEST 3, ISAR-TEST 4, and LEADERS randomized trials. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1214–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Navarese EP, Tandjung K, Claessen B, Andreotti F, Kowalewski M, Kandzari DE, et al. Safety and efficacy outcomes of first and second generation durable polymer drug eluting stents and biodegradable polymer biolimus eluting stents in clinical practice: comprehensive network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;347:f6530.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Basalus MW, Ankone MJ, van Houwelingen GK, de Man FH, von Birgelen C. Coating irregularities of durable polymer-based drug-eluting stents as assessed by scanning electron microscopy. EuroIntervention. 2009;5:157–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Basalus MW, van Houwelingen KG, Ankone M, de Man FH, von Birgelen C. Scanning electron microscopic assessment of the biodegradable coating on expanded biolimus-eluting stents. EuroIntervention. 2009;5:505–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Tada N, Virmani R, Grant G, Bartlett L, Black A, Clavijo C, et al. Polymer-free biolimus a9-coated stent demonstrates more sustained intimal inhibition, improved healing, and reduced inflammation compared with a polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting cypher stent in a porcine model. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:174–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Mehilli J, Kastrati A, Wessely R, Dibra A, Hausleiter J, Jaschke B, et al. Randomized trial of a nonpolymer-based rapamycin-eluting stent versus a polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent for the reduction of late lumen loss. Circulation. 2006;113:273–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Carrie D, Berland J, Verheye S, Hauptmann KE, Vrolix M, Violini R, et al. A multicenter randomized trial comparing amphilimus- with paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo native coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1371–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Costa Jr JR, Abizaid A, Costa R, Feres F, Tanajura LF, Abizaid A, et al. 1-year results of the hydroxyapatite polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent for the treatment of single de novo coronary lesions: the VESTASYNC I trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2009;2:422–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Grube E. Biofreedom: polymer-free drug-eluting stent – 3 year results. Presentation at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics. October 2012. Available http://www.tctmd.com.

  73. Urban P, Abizaid A, Chevalier B, Greene S, Meredith I, Morice MC, et al. Rationale and design of the LEADERS FREE trial: a randomized double-blind comparison of the BioFreedom drug-coated stent vs the Gazelle bare metal stent in patients at high bleeding risk using a short (1 month) course of dual antiplatelet therapy. Am Heart J. 2013;165:704–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Garasic JM, Edelman ER, Squire JC, Seifert P, Williams MS, Rogers C. Stent and artery geometry determine intimal thickening independent of arterial injury. Circulation. 2000;101:812–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Sullivan TM, Ainsworth SD, Langan EM, Taylor S, Snyder B, Cull D, et al. Effect of endovascular stent strut geometry on vascular injury, myointimal hyperplasia, and restenosis. J Vasc Surg. 2002;36:143–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Dirschinger J, Dotzer F, Schuhlen H, Neumann FJ, et al. Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: strut thickness effect on restenosis outcome (ISAR-STEREO) trial. Circulation. 2001;103:2816–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Pache J, Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Schuhlen H, Dotzer F, Hausleiter J, et al. Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: strut thickness effect on restenosis outcome (ISAR-STEREO-2) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:1283–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Briguori C, Sarais C, Pagnotta P, Liistro F, Montorfano M, Chieffo A, et al. In-stent restenosis in small coronary arteries: impact of strut thickness. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Timmins LH, Miller MW, Clubb Jr FJ, Moore Jr JE. Increased artery wall stress post-stenting leads to greater intimal thickening. Lab Invest. 2011;91:955–67.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Pache J, Dibra A, Mehilli J, Dirschinger J, Schomig A, Kastrati A. Drug-eluting stents compared with thin-strut bare stents for the reduction of restenosis: a prospective, randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:1262–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kereiakes DJ, Cannon LA, Feldman RL, Popma JJ, Magorien R, Whitbourn R, et al. Clinical and angiographic outcomes after treatment of de novo coronary stenoses with a novel platinum chromium thin-strut stent: primary results of the PERSEUS (Prospective Evaluation in a Randomized Trial of the Safety and Efficacy of the Use of the TAXUS Element Paclitaxel-Eluting Coronary Stent System) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:264–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Aoki J, Nakazawa G, Tanabe K, Hoye A, Yamamoto H, Nakayama T, et al. Incidence and clinical impact of coronary stent fracture after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;69:380–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Park MW, Chang K, Her SH, Lee JM, Choi YS, Kim DB, et al. Incidence and clinical impact of fracture of drug-eluting stents widely used in current clinical practice: comparison with initial platform of sirolimus-eluting stent. J Cardiol. 2012;60:215–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Mamas MA, Williams PD. Longitudinal stent deformation: insights on mechanisms, treatments and outcomes from the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:196–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. von Birgelen C, Sen H, Lam MK, Danse PW, Jessurun GA, Hautvast RW, et al. Third-generation zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting stents in all-comer patients requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention (DUTCH PEERS): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2014;383:413–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Garg S, Serruys PW. Coronary stents: looking forward. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:S43–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Lafont A, Abizaid A, Waksman R, Ormiston J. Bioresorable Scaffolds. In: Eeckhout E, Serruys PW, Wijns W, Vahanian A, van Sambeek M, editors. Percutaneous interventional cardiovascular medicine. Paris: Europa Edition Publishing; 2012. p. 145–77. Part III, Chapter 4.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Dudek D, Smits PC, Koolen J, Chevalier B, et al. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting vascular scaffold for the treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: 12-month clinical and imaging outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1578–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Serruys PW, Ormiston JA, Onuma Y, Regar E, Gonzalo N, Garcia-Garcia HM, et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (ABSORB): 2-year outcomes and results from multiple imaging methods. Lancet. 2009;373:897–910.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Erbel R, Di Mario C, Bartunek J, Bonnier J, de Bruyne B, Eberli FR, et al. Temporary scaffolding of coronary arteries with bioabsorbable magnesium stents: a prospective, non-randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2007;369:1869–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Haude M, Erbel R, Erne P, Verheye S, Degen H, Bose D, et al. Safety and performance of the drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS) in patients with de-novo coronary lesions: 12 month results of the prospective, multicentre, first-in-man BIOSOLVE-I trial. Lancet. 2013;381:836–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Abizaid A. The REVA tyrosine polycarbonate bioabsorbable stent: lessons learned and future directions. Presentation at Transcatheter Therapeutics, San Francisco, 22nd Sept 2009. Available online: http://www.tctmd.com/txshow.aspx?tid=939090&id=84050&trid=938634. Accessed 14 Oct 2009.

  93. Abizaid A, Brachnam JC, Coste J, et al. 12 Morth Angiographic and clinical results of the REZOLVE sirolimos eluting bioresorbable coronary scaffold: the restore trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62(18–51):B13.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Yan J, Bhat VD. Elixir Medical’s bioresorbable drug eluting stent (BDES) programme: an overview. EuroIntervention. 2009;5:F80–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Chammie D, Abizaid A, Webste M, et al. Evaluation of the novel desolve myolimus-eluting bioresorbable coronary scaffold system for theatment of de novo coronary arteries: six months optical coherence tomography results from de solve FIM. Trial J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60(17–5)

    Google Scholar 

  96. Jabara R, Chronos N, Robinson K. Novel bioabsorbable salicylate-based polymer as a drug-eluting stent coating. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;72:186–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Jabara R, Pendyala L, Geva S, Chen J, Chronos N, Robinson K. Novel fully bioabsorbable salicylate-based sirolimus-eluting stent. EuroIntervention. 2009;5(Suppl F):F58–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Fajadet J. The ART stent: design and early first-in-man experiences. Miami: Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics; October 15, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Shen L, Wang Q, Wu Y, Xie J, Zhang F, Ge L, et al. Preliminary evaluation of fully bioabsorbable PLLA sirolimus eluting stents in a porcine model. Chin J Interv Cardiol. 2009;19:301–5.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Shen L, Wang Q, Wu Y, Xie J, Ge J. Short-term effects of sirolimus eluting fully bioabsorbable polymeric coronary stents in a porcine model. Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Ormiston JA, Serruys PW, Regar E, Dudek D, Thuesen L, Webster MW, et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent system for patients with single de-novo coronary artery lesions (ABSORB): a prospective open-label trial. Lancet. 2008;371:899–907.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Abizaid A, Costa Jr JR, Bartorelli AL, Whitbourn R, van Geuns RJ, Chevalier B, et al. The ABSORB EXTEND study: preliminary report of the twelve-month clinical outcomes in the first 512 patients enrolled. EuroIntervention. 2014;10(12):1396–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Dudek D, Cequier A, Carrie D, Iniguez A, et al. A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1-year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:43–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Muramatsu T, Onuma Y, Zhang YJ, Bourantas CV, Kharlamov A, Diletti R, et al. Progress in treatment by percutaneous coronary intervention: the stent of the future. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2013;66:483–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Costopoulos C, Latib A, Naganuma T, Miyazaki T, Sato K, Figini F, et al. Comparison of early clinical outcomes between ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold and everolimus-eluting stent implantation in a real-world population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:E10–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Capranzano P, Gargiulo G, Capodanno D, Longo G, Tamburino C, Ohno Y, et al. Treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. Minerva Cardioangiol. 2014;62:229–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Grundeken MJ, Hassell ME, Kraak RP, de Bruin DM, Koch KT, Henriques JP, et al. Treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold in combination with the Tryton dedicated coronary bifurcation stent: evaluation using two- and three-dimensional optical coherence tomography. Eurointervention 2014: pii 20130806. doi:104244 (Epud ahead of print).

    Google Scholar 

  108. Mattesini A, Secco GG, Dall’Ara G, Ghione M, Rama-Merchan JC, Lupi A, et al. ABSORB biodegradable stents versus second-generation metal stents: a comparison study of 100 complex lesions treated under OCT guidance. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:741–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Kraak RP, Hassell ME, Grundeken MJ, Koch KT, Henriques JP, Piek JJ, et al. Initial experience and clinical evaluation of the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) in real-world practice: the AMC Single Centre Real World PCI Registry. EuroIntervention. 2015;10:1160–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Ormiston JA, Serruys PW, Onuma Y, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, Dudek D, et al. First serial assessment at 6 months and 2 years of the second generation of absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:620–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Bourantas CV, Papafaklis MI, Kotsia A, Farooq V, Muramatsu T, Gomez-Lara J, et al. Effect of the endothelial shear stress patterns on neointimal proliferation following drug-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: an optical coherence tomography study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:315–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia HM, Muramatsu T, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, et al. Dynamics of vessel wall changes following the implantation of the absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. EuroIntervention. 2014;9:1271–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Farooq V, Serruys PW, Heo JH, Gogas BD, Onuma Y, Perkins LE, et al. Intracoronary optical coherence tomography and histology of overlapping everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in a porcine coronary artery model: the potential implications for clinical practice. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:523–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Ormiston JA, de Bruyne B, Regar E, Dudek D, et al. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold for treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: six-month clinical and imaging outcomes. Circulation. 2010;122:2301–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Sato T, Abdel-Wahab M, Richardt G. Very late thrombosis observed on optical coherence tomography 22 months after the implantation of a polymer-based bioresorbable vascular scaffold. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(20):1273.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, Royal Blackburn Hospital, East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust, Blackburn, Lancashire, BB2 3HH, UK

    Scot Garg MBChB, MRCP, PhD, FESC

  2. Department of Cardiology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Patrick W. Serruys MD, PhD, FESC

  3. International Centre for Cardiovascular Health, Imperial College, London, UK

    Patrick W. Serruys MD, PhD, FESC

Authors
  1. Scot Garg MBChB, MRCP, PhD, FESC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick W. Serruys MD, PhD, FESC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick W. Serruys MD, PhD, FESC .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. UCSF Fresno, Fresno, California, USA

    John A. Ambrose

  2. Department of Interventional Cardiology, Otamendi Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Alfredo E. Rodríguez

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Garg, S., Serruys, P.W. (2015). What Is the Optimal Stent Design Interventionalist’s View. In: Ambrose, J., Rodríguez, A. (eds) Controversies in Cardiology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20415-4_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20415-4_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20414-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20415-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation