This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
GHOST-CTO: Bioresorbable scaffolds yield lower success rates than DES for CTO PCI
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
For percutaneous treatment of chronic total occlusions, bioresorbable scaffolds were associated with higher rates of technical and procedural failure compared with second-generation drug-eluting stents, according to findings from the GHOST-CTO registry.
In the prospective, observational study, researchers evaluated 32 consecutive patients who underwent CTO PCI with a bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb, Abbott Vascular) at Ferrarotto Hospital in Catania, Italy, between May 2013 and May 2014. Patients were considered eligible for bioresorbable scaffolds if they had a minimum of one chronic totally occluded vessel with signs of significant myocardial anemia. The researchers compared these patients with a historical control group of patients (n = 54) who had undergone CTO PCI in the 2 previous years with second-generation DES.
The primary outcomes of interest were technical success and procedural success. Technical success was defined as successful scaffold/stent delivery and placement at the target lesion after CTO recanalization, achieving a final residual stenosis of less than 30% within the treated segment and re-establishment of TIMI grade 3 flow in the target vessel. Procedural success was defined as technical success free of MACE (composite of death, MI and target lesion revascularization) during hospitalization.
Baseline characteristics between the groups were comparable, except for a larger mean vessel diameter in the bioresorbable scaffold group (2.92 ± 0.34 mm vs. 2.5 ± 0.68 mm; P < .001).
The rate of technical success in the bioresorbable scaffold group was 78.1% vs. 96.3% in the DES group (P = .012). Technical failure in the bioresorbable scaffold group was attributable to maximal residual stenosis greater than 30% in six patients and delivery failure at the target lesion site in one patient. Procedural success was 78.1% in the bioresorbable scaffold group vs. 94.4% in the DES group (P = .035). Patients in the bioresorbable scaffold group were free of events throughout their stay in the hospital, whereas the DES group had one case of death. There was no significant difference between the groups in the occurrence of periprocedural MI, side branch occlusion or contrast-related acute kidney injury. Frequency domain OCT analysis revealed 14 (22%) cases of scaffold underexpansion. Significant edge dissections occurred in two (3%) cases and bioresorbable scaffold fractures were seen in two (3%) cases.
“In this single-center series, [bioresorbable scaffold] use for CTOs recanalization was affected by higher technical and procedural failure compared to second-generation DES, mostly related to suboptimal scaffold expansion,” the researchers wrote. “Aggressive lesion preparation together with device ameliorations will be a key to enable routine use of [bioresorbable scaffold] in the CTO setting.” – by Jennifer Byrne
Disclosure: Two researchers report receiving speaker’s honoraria from Abbott Vascular.
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts