Abstract:OBJECTIVES The authors sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the NeoVas bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) compared with metallic drug-eluting stents. BACKGROUND BRS have the potential to improve very late outcomes compared with metallic drug-eluting stents, but some BRS have been associated with increased rates of device thrombosis before complete bioresorption. NeoVas is a new poly-L-lactic acid BRS that elutes sirolimus from a poly-D, L-lactide coating. METHODS Eligible patients with a single de novo native coronary artery lesion with a reference vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.75 mm and a lesion length <= 20 mm were randomized 1: 1 to NeoVas BRS versus cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES). Angiographic follow-up was performed in all patients at 1 year. The primary endpoint was angio-graphic in-segment late loss (LL), and the major secondary endpoint was the rate of angina. Baseline and follow-up optical coherence tomography and fractional flow reserve were performed in a pre-specified subgroup of patients. RESULTS The authors randomized 560 patients at 32 centers to treatment with NeoVas (n = 278) versus CoCr-EES (n = 282). One-year in-segment LL with NeoVas and CoCr-EES were 0.14 +/- 0.36 mm versus 0.11 +/- 0.34 mm (difference 0.03 mm; upper 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval 0.09 mm; p(noninferiority) < 0.0001; p(superiority) = 0.36). Clinical outcomes at 1 year were similar in the 2 groups, as were the rates of recurrent angina (27.9% vs. 32.1%; p = 0.26). Optical coherence tomography at 1 year demonstrated a higher proportion of covered struts (98.7% vs. 96.2%; p < 0.001), less strut malapposition (0% vs. 0.6%; p < 0.001), and a smaller minimal lumen area (4.71 +/- 1.64 vs. 6.00 +/- 2.15 mm(2); p < 0.001) with NeoVas compared with CoCr-EES respectively, with nonsignificant differences in fractional flow reserve (0.89 +/- 0.08 vs. 0.91 +/- 0.06; p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS The NeoVas BRS was noninferior to CoCr-EES for the primary endpoint of 1-year angiographic in-segment LL, and resulted in comparable 1-year clinical outcomes, including recurrent angina. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

A Randomized Trial Comparing the NeoVas Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold and Metallic Everolimus-Eluting Stents.

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

A randomised comparison of a novel abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent: clinical and angiographic follow-up of the TARGET I trial

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

A Randomized Trial Comparing A Novel Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Witheverolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents In Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Two-Year Clinical Outcomes

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

Comparison of the “late Catch-Up” Phenomenon Between BuMA Supreme and XIENCE Stents Through Serial Optical Coherence Tomography at 1–2 Month and 2 Year Follow-Ups: A Multicenter Study

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

Thinner Strut Sirolimus-Eluting BRS Versus EES in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease p FUTURE-II Trial

A Prospective, Randomized Trial of Bioresorbable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Fully Bioresorbable Scaffolds in Patients Undergoing Coronary Stenting

Thinner-Strut Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: FUTURE-II Trial

Twelve-month Angiographic and Clinical Outcomes of the XINSORB Bioresorbable Sirolimus-Eluting Scaffold and a Metallic Stent in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

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

One-year Clinical Outcomes and Multislice Computed Tomography Angiographic Results Following Implantation of the NeoVas Bioresorbable Sirolimus-Eluting Scaffold in Patients with Single De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Clinical and multimodality imaging results at 6 months of a bioresorbable sirolimus-eluting scaffold for patients with single de novo coronary artery lesions: the NeoVas first-in-man trial.

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

The efficacy and safety of bioresorbable bascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis

TCT-567 Long-Term Outcomes with an Abluminal Groove-Filled Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus a Cobalt-Chromium Everolimus-Eluting Stent in Single De Novo Coronary Lesions: Four-Year Results of the TARGET I Randomized Controlled Trial

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

Long-Term Effects of Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare Metal Stents on Patients with Acute St-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Outcomes of 3-Year Clinical Follow-Up