BACKGROUND: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have been developed to provide support to the vessel wall during the healing process after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), being reabsorbed afterwards. Because the scaffold is made of polymeric material, there is a concern regarding the acute recoil of the device. We compared the BVS acute recoil with that of two different metallic drug-eluting stents. METHODS: Fifty patients with non-complex lesions were included. Twenty-five of these patients were treated with a BVS who were compared to 25 patients treated with a cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (EES, n = 12) or a stainless steel biolimus-eluting stent (BES, n = 13). Acute recoil was defined as the difference between the mean diameter of the balloon during maximum inflation pressure (X) and the mean diameter of the stent immediately after balloon deflation (Y). The percentage of acute recoil was defined as (X-Y)/X. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. Acute luminal gain was lower with BVS compared to EES and BES (1.51 ± 0.41 mm vs. 1.76 ± 0.28 mm vs. 1.9 ± 0.42 mm, P = 0.02). Acute recoil was 0.21 ± 0.13 mm vs. 0.15 ± 0.08 mm vs. 0.14 ± 0.08 mm (P = 0.21) and the percentage of acute recoil was 7.0 ± 4.6% vs. 5.0 ± 2.2% vs. 5.7 ± 4.1% (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: BVS presented a slightly higher, although not significant, acute recoil than the two second-generation metallic drug-eluting stents.
Percutaneous coronary intervention; Durg-eluting stents; Absorbable implants; Coronary angiography
