Total amount: € 0,00
Official Journal of the Italian Society of Angiology and Vascular Pathology
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,752
Online ISSN 1827-1618
Dario BUCCHERI 1, 2, Davide PIRAINO 1, 2, Paola R. CHIRCO 2, Bernardo CORTESE 1
1 Azienda Ospedaliera Fatebenefratelli, Milan, Italy; 2 Paolo Giaccone University Hospital, Palermo, Italy
Bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) represents a breakthrough in interventional cardiology. Despite BVS is used in various settings, nowadays only few studies compared BVS outcome with everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. We analyzed the currently available scientific data of direct and indirect comparison between BVS and EES in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). Our paper highlights consistently different procedural techniques between BVS and EES. Across the wide spectrum of the studies analyzed, the clinical outcomes was similar between the two treatments. Some studies show an increased rate of device thrombosis although never significant and probably related to the technique of implantation. According to our analysis, from several points of view the BVS technology appears not inferior to EES in PPCI. Moreover, in this setting BVS seems an intriguing option for young patients, due to frequent incidence of single vessel disease in these patients, restore of vascular motility after reabsorption and no presence of ethernal prosthesis. However, we deem necessary a direct comparison between the two technologies, assessing hard clinical endpoints.