Abstract:We read with great interest the article by Onuma et al. [1] which evaluated the long-term safety and efficacy of ABSORB bioasorbable everolimus-eluting stent (BVS) scaffold. The investigators of the study have made pioneering contributions to the assessment of bioresorbable scaffolds. It was concluded that sustained safety could be achieved after the implantation of a fully bioresorbable Absorb everolimus-eluting scalffold with a low event rate at 5 years. Besides, the ABSORB Cohort A trial confirmed the feasibility of noninvasive anatomic and functional assessment of the scaffold with the use of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) angiography and MSCT-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment. However, we have several concerns with regard to the study. First, we have to notice that noninvasive FFR analysis was feasible only in 13 patients. The limited size has weakened the reliability of noninvasive FFR performance in assessing functional outcome of ABSORB BVS. Good image quality of all coronary arteries and accurate lumen boundary descriptions are essential for the noninvasive FFR interpretation [2]. Although published reports suggested that CT derived FFR (FFRCT) accuracy was less affected by MSCT image quality than CT stenosis [3], there were four patients (22.2%) who cannot have FFRCT analysis due to severe artifact. Besides, in those with feasible FFRCT, numerous artifacts including calcification, motion, and misregistration may also affect MSCT performance and lead to inaccurate anatomic models for FFRCT computation [4]. Thus, the feasibility and precision of FFRCT need to be further improved. It is not appropriate to use FFRCT alone as a hemodynamic parameter in functional coronary stenosis measurement. Second, a fly in the ointment of the study was the absence of invasive FFR as a reference against noninvasive FFRCT at 5 years. Despite Onuma et al. demonstrated several reasons that they decided to perform repeat MSCT alone instead of invasive imaging, we cannot deny the fact that no published convincing trial exists for FFRCT in the evaluation of interventional treatment [4], although the DISCOVER-FLOW study [5] validated that the FFRCT had a good correlation with an invasive FFR, and the DeFACTO trial [6] demonstrated that the FFRCT plus CT was superior to CT alone as a measure of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) stenosis severity for determination of lesion-specific ischemia. Finally, in the study, angiographic reference standard of the vessel lumen area was derived from MSCT analysis instead of invasive coronary angiography [1]. It is important, however, to note that there is an overestimation of stenosis severity identified by CCTA and even among severe stenosis confirmed by invasive coronary angiography, only a minority cause ischemia [4,6]. Therefore, the possible deviation resulted from the inaccurate reference of MSCT may make the results less convincible.

Evaluation of potential substrates for restenosis and thrombosis in overlapped versus edge-to-edge juxtaposed bioabsorbable scaffolds: Insights from a computed fluid dynamic study

Edge-to-Edge Technique to Minimize Ovelapping of Multiple Bioresorbable Scaffolds Plus Drug Eluting Stents in Revascularization of Long Diffuse Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Disease.

Local Flow Patterns after Implantation of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold in Coronary Bifurcations - Novel Findings by Computational Fluid Dynamics -

Rheolytic Effects of Left Main Mid-Shaft/distal Stenting: a Computational Flow Dynamic Analysis

Computational replication of the patient-specific stenting procedure for coronary artery bifurcations: From OCT and CT imaging to structural and hemodynamics analyses

Degree of bioresorbable vascular scaffold expansion modulates loss of essential function

Long-term outcomes following bioresorbable vascular scaffolds

In Vivo Reconstruction Of Coronary Artery And Bioresorbable Stents From Intracoronary Optical Coherence Tomography

Non-invasive Evaluation of Fluid Dynamic of Aortoiliac Atherosclerotic Disease: Impact of Bifurcation Angle and Different Stent Configurations

Angiography-Based Superficial Wall Strain of De Novo Stenotic Coronary Arteries: Serial Assessment of Vessels Treated with Bioresorbable Scaffold or Drug-Eluting Stent.

Efficacy and safety of bioresorbable scaffolds in patients with coronary bifurcation lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Challenges in Multislice Computed Tomography Based Fractional Flow Reserve to Evaluate Interventional Treatment

Complex coronary bifurcation treatment by a novel stenting technique: Bench test, fluid dynamic study and clinical outcomes.

Follow-up of coronary artery patency after implantation of bioresorbable coronary scaffolds: The emerging role of magnetic coronary artery imaging

Current perspectives on bioresorbable scaffolds in coronary intervention and other fields

Mid-to-long term clinical outcomes with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus everolimus-eluting metallic stent in coronary artery diseases: a meta-analysis of 7321 patients

Is It Safe to Implant Bioresorbable Scaffolds in Ostial Side-Branch Lesions? Impact of ‘Neo-Carina’ Formation on Main-Branch Flow Pattern. Longitudinal Clinical Observations

Impact of postdilatation on performance of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in patients with acute coronary syndrome compared with everolimus-eluting stents: A propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter "real-world" registry

Fusion of optical coherence tomographic and angiographic data for more accurate evaluation of the endothelial shear stress patterns and neointimal distribution after bioresorbable scaffold implantation: comparison with intravascular ultrasound-derived reconstructions

Intravascular ultrasound predictors of long-term outcomes following ABSORB bioresorbable scaffold implantation: A pooled analysis of the ABSORB III and ABSORB Japan trials

Effects of Local Hemodynamics and Plaque Characteristics on Neointimal Response Following Bioresorbable Scaffolds Implantation in Coronary Bifurcations.