Long-Term Results of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis: The RIBS VI Study

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Aug 12;17(15):1825-1836. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2024.05.038.

Abstract

Background: In patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) provide similar results to drug-coated balloons (DCBs) but are inferior to drug-eluting stents (DES) at 1 year. However, the long-term efficacy of BVS in these patients remains unknown.

Objectives: This study sought to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of BVS in patients with ISR.

Methods: RIBS VI (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment; NCT02672878) and RIBS VI Scoring (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment With Scoring Balloon; NTC03069066) are prospective multicenter studies designed to evaluate the results of BVS in patients with ISR (N = 220). The inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical to those used in the RIBS IV (ISR of DES) (Restenosis Intra-stent of Drug-eluting Stents: Drug-eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-eluting Stent; NCT01239940) and RIBS V (ISR of bare-metal stents) (Restenosis Intra-stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-eluting Stent; NCT01239953) randomized trials (including 249 ISR patients treated with DCBs and 249 ISR patients treated with DES). A prespecified comparison of the long-term results obtained with these treatment modalities (ie, DES, DCBs, and BVS) was performed.

Results: Clinical follow-up at 3 years was obtained in all (100%) 718 patients. The 3-year target lesion revascularization rate after BVS was 14.1% (vs 12.9% after DCBs [not significant], and 5.2% after DES [HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.47-5.36; P = 0.001]). In a landmark analysis (>1 year), the target lesion revascularization rate after BVS was higher than after DES (adjusted HR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.15-10.08) and DCBs (adjusted HR: 3.33; 95% CI: 1.14-9.70). Very late vessel thrombosis was also more frequent with BVS (BVS: 1.8%, DCBs: 0.4%, DES: 0%; P = 0.03).

Conclusions: In patients with ISR, late clinical results of DES are superior to those obtained with DCBs and BVS. Beyond the first year, DCBs are safer and more effective than BVS.

Keywords: bioresorbable vascular scaffold; drug-eluting balloons; drug-eluting stent(s); in-stent restenosis.

Publication types

  • Multicenter Study

MeSH terms

  • Absorbable Implants*
  • Aged
  • Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary / adverse effects
  • Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary / instrumentation
  • Cardiovascular Agents / administration & dosage
  • Cardiovascular Agents / adverse effects
  • Coated Materials, Biocompatible
  • Coronary Artery Disease / diagnostic imaging
  • Coronary Artery Disease / therapy
  • Coronary Restenosis* / diagnostic imaging
  • Coronary Restenosis* / etiology
  • Coronary Restenosis* / therapy
  • Drug-Eluting Stents
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / adverse effects
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / instrumentation
  • Prospective Studies
  • Prosthesis Design*
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Risk Factors
  • Stents
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome

Substances

  • Cardiovascular Agents
  • Coated Materials, Biocompatible