Procedural resources utilization and clinical outcomes with bioresorbable everolimus‐eluting scaffolds and Pt‐Cr everolimus‐eluting stent with resorbable abluminal polymer in clinical practice. A randomized trial

Objectives We sought to compare the procedural implications of using bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffolds (BVS) and Pt-Cr everolimus-eluting stent with abluminal bioabsorbable polymer (Synergy). Background There are important differences in the respective platforms, which could impact on procedural performance, complications and outcomes. Methods A prospective, randomized single center study including consecutive patients in stable clinical condition and with lesions amenable to be treated with BVS according to predefined criteria. Patients were randomized to either treatment with BVS or Synergy. All procedural data were collected and 12 months clinical follow up conducted. Primary objectives were fluoroscopy time, median dose-area product, contras agent volumen, and peri-procedural troponin release. Results A total of 200 patients were included, 100 in BVS group and 100 in Synergy group. No significant differences were observed in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. Predilatation (97.6 vs. 25.4%; P < 0.001), postdilatation (64.8 vs. 38.4%: P < 0.01), and use of 2 wires (20.8 vs. 10%; P = 0.02) were more frequent with BVS. The BVS group showed a significant increase in fluoroscopy time (18%), dose-area product (20%), and contrast volume (10%). Post-procedural increase of creatinine was similar and amount of TnI release was significantly higher with BVS but incidence of peri-procedural infarction was comparable. Clinical outcomes at 12 months were similar with definite thrombosis being 1% with BVS and 0% with Synergy. Conclusions The use of BVS in comparison with the Synergy stent in a similar lesional setting is associated with a higher use of resources in the procedure, more radiation, and higher TnI release. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.