Commentary

Resorbable coronary scaffolds require ‘leap of faith’


 

References

“I think we can do better if people pay better attention to their technique.” Dr. Stone said. But it remains to be seen whether the inferior performance of Absorb relative to a metallic stent can be overcome with better training and technique, and if so, whether operators will be willing to take the extra steps required to overcome the challenges of the device. Some physicians “will focus on the fact that target-lesion failure was higher with Absorb, and they will want to wait to see whether Absorb actually improves hard outcomes,” he acknowledged. “Some will focus on the promise; other will say ‘show me the data.’ ”

One of his collaborators on ABSORB III, Dr. Dean J. Kereiakes, said that opting for Absorb will require a “leap of faith.”

“Absorb has limitations,” Dr. Stone concluded. “Physician and patient opinions will vary, and the device is not for every patient and every lesion.”

Physicians will soon need to start deciding exactly which patients in their practice, if any, are good candidates for a BVS.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

Pages

Recommended Reading

Botox suppresses atrial fibrillation after CABG
MDedge Cardiology
TCT: SAPIEN XT TAVR system gains valve-in-valve indication
MDedge Cardiology
TCT: TAVR outcomes show further improvement
MDedge Cardiology
Low incidence of DVT reported after percutaneous EVAR
MDedge Cardiology
VIDEO: Drug-coated balloons offer in-stent restenosis option
MDedge Cardiology
ACS: Hopkins risk score predicts need for early nutrition after cardiac surgery
MDedge Cardiology
TCT: FORMA system tested in severe tricuspid regurgitation
MDedge Cardiology
TCT: Extended follow-up supports PFO closure in cryptogenic stroke
MDedge Cardiology
Polymer-free drug-coated stent matches drug-eluting stent at 5 years
MDedge Cardiology
ACS: No pull-out pneumothorax with ‘party balloon Valsalva’
MDedge Cardiology

Related Articles