Summary

Background:

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) is a promising technology that potentially offers several advantages over contemporary coronary drug-eluting stents (DES). Crucial to BVS implantation is the correct choice of scaffold size (diameter and length) in order to avoid "geographic miss" in length, provide the maximal support to the vessel wall, and avoid leaving “free-floating” foreign material in the coronary vasculature. 

Objectives:

To assess the optimal method for measuring coronary stenosis prior to BVS implantation.

Methods:

We compared the performance of two quantitative coronary angiography assessment (QCA) techniques: two dimensional real-time QCA (2D-QCA) and offline 3D QCA (3D-QCA) for the evaluation of coronary lesions in patients enrolled in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of BVS vs. metallic stents, by calculating the weighted kappa value for agreement regarding optimal BVS size with the reference method – CoreLab offline 2D-QCA measurements..In addition, we collected 2 year clinical outcomes (death/myocardial infarction/repeat revascularization/scaffold thrombosis) in BVS-implanted patients.

Results:

In 17 patients with available CoreLab data, the weighted kappa for agreement for 3D-QCA was significantly better than for 2D-QCA (0.90, 95%CI 0.72–1.00 vs. 0.439, 95%CI 0.16–0.77). The rate of clinical events at 2 years was low (9.5%).

Conclusions:

Initial experience in a small group of carefully selected patients at our institution, suggests that the use of BVS for coronary revascularization is associated with a low rate of adverse events in suitable patients. 3D-QCA may be superior to 2D-QCA analysis in terms of reproducibility, and results in more patients receiving optimal size BVS.