Abstract:Importance: Physicians have been criticized for having an overly enthusiastic response to new device approvals, especially for novel technologies. However, to our knowledge, the rates of new product adoption and patterns of new device usage in clinical practice have not been well described. Objective: To characterize the patterns of uptake of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) within the United States following device approval and to describe changes in response to subsequent releases of data and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warnings. Design, setting, and participants: This analysis of the uptake of BVS between January 2016 and June 2017 used CathPCI Registry data; all percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures with an implant of either a BVS or conventional stent were included. Data analysis was performed in October 2017. Exposures: Implant of BVS. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was monthly use of BVS in the United States. In addition, the characteristics of patients who received BVS and of hospitals that used BVS were assessed and comparisons of patient characteristics between BVS recipients and patients who were treated contemporaneously with metallic stents were made. Results: Of 682 951 procedures, 471 064 (69.0%) were done in men, 587 301 (86.0%) were among white people, and the mean (SD) age of those undergoing procedures with BVS vs conventional stents was 62.6 (11.4) years vs 65.7 (11.9) years. Of these, 4265 procedures (0.6%) used BVS overall (after FDA approval of BVS). Procedures with implants of BVS occurred among patients with fewer comorbidities and lower-acuity presentations compared with procedures with implants of conventional stents. The patient characteristics for BVS use were not dissimilar to the inclusion criteria of the ABSORB III FDA approval trial, with notable differences based on trial eligibility (eg, excluding patients with myocardial infarctions). The maximum monthly use of BVS was 1.25% of all PCI procedures that occurred 90 days after FDA approval, but with site-to-site variability. Declines in use were observed coincident with the scientific presentation of adverse event data as well as FDA warnings. Conclusions and relevance: Most US physicians and hospitals were selective in their use of BVS, primarily using them in patients similar to those in the device's FDA approval trial. In addition, declines in use were evident in the subsequent month following the release of data that reported negative outcomes. These results illustrate an example of an appropriate physician response to adverse data updates and FDA warnings.

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

Three‐year Clinical Outcomes of the Novel Sirolimus‐eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold for the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Prospective Patient‐level Pooled Analysis of NeoVas Trials

5-Year Outcomes After Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffolds Implanted With Improved Technique

Clinical Outcomes Prior to and Following Complete Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Resorption: Five-Year Follow-Up From the ABSORB III Trial.

The Absorb GT1 Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold System - 5-Year Post-Market Surveillance Study in Japan

Biolimus-coated Versus Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis (BIO ASCEND ISR): a Randomised, Non-Inferiority Trial.

Long-term outcomes following bioresorbable vascular scaffolds

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

Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds and Metallic Stents: Three-Year Clinical Outcomes from the ABSORB China Randomised Trial

Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Versus Metallic Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: ABSORB China Trial.

Oct Assessment of the Long-Term Vascular Healing Response 5 Years after Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold

Thirty-Day and One-Year Clinical Outcomes of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation: A Single-Center Experience

Effect of Post-Dilatation Following Primary PCI With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent Implantation: An Angiographic and Optical Coherence Tomography TROFI II Substudy

One-year clinical outcomes after unrestricted implantation of the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold (RAI registry)

Safety and Efficacy of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Real-World Practice

Three-year Clinical Outcomes of a Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold (XINSORB) and a Metallic Stent to Treat Coronary Artery Stenosis.

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

Uptake of Drug-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Clinical Practice: An NCDR Registry to Practice Project

Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided Optimal Stent Expansion on 3-Year Hard Clinical Outcomes

CRT-100.03 Pre- and Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Quantitative Flow Ratio: an Analysis and Tentative Prediction of 2-Year Vessel-Oriented Composite Events in the MULTIVESSEL TALENT Trial

Lesion impacts on long-term outcomes in patients implanted with bioresorbable vascular scaffold