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

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

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

A randomized comparison of healing response of the BuMA Supreme stent and Xience stent at one- and two-month follow-up: PIONEER-II OCT randomized controlled 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Design and Rationale of Targeted Therapy With a Sirolimus-Eluting, Biodegradable Polymer Coronary Stent in Chronic Total Occlusions (TARGET CTO): A Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

A Randomised Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer- and Permanent Polymer-Coated Platinum-Chromium Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents in China: the EVOLVE China Study

Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Abluminal Groove-Filled Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Lesions: 12-Month Results from the TARGET II Trial.

Comparison of everolimus- and biolimus-eluting coronary stents with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: Two-year clinical outcomes of the EVERBIO II trial

A Randomized Comparison of Novel Biodegradable Polymer- and Durable Polymer-Coated Cobalt-Chromium Sirolimus-Eluting Stents.

Five-Year Comparative Efficacy of Everolimus-Eluting vs. Resolute Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Abluminal Groove‐filled Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐eluting Stent for the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Lesions: Two‐year Results from a Prospective Patient‐level Pooled Analysis of TARGET Trials