Poor past and look forward

stenting, scaffold, long-term outcomes

1. Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Sotomi Y, et al. Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimuseluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, singleblind, multicentre clinical trial. Lancet. 2016;388(10059):2479-91. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32050-5. Erratum in: Lancet. 2017;389(10071):804.

2. Elias J, van Dongen IM, Kraak RP, et al. Mid-term and long-term safety and efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus metallic everolimus-eluting stents in coronary artery disease: A weighted meta-analysis of seven randomised controlled trials including 5577 patients. Neth Heart J. 2017;25:429-38. doi:10.1007/s12471-017-1008-x.

3. Wykrzykowska JJ, Kraak RP, Hofma SH, et al. Bioresorbable scaffolds versus metallic stents in routine PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2319-28. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1614954.

4. Mukherjee D. Device Thrombosis with Bioresorbable Scaffolds. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(24):2388-9. doi:10.1056/NEJMe1703202.

5. Ali ZA, Gao R, Kimura T, et al. Three-Year Outcomes With the Absorb Bioresorbable Scaffold: Individual-Patient-Data MetaAnalysis From the ABSORB Randomized Trials. Circulation. 2018;137(5):464-79. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.031843.

6. Kereiakes DJ, Ellis SG, Metzger DC, et al; ABSORB III Investigators. Clinical Outcomes Before and After Complete Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Resorption: Five-Year Follow-Up From the ABSORB III Trial. Circulation. 2019;140(23):1895-903. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.042584.

7. Räber L, Ueki Y. Bioresorbable Scaffolds: Unfulfilled Prophecies. Circulation. 2019;140(23):1917-20. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043773.

8. Smits PC, on behalf of the COMPARE-ABSORB investigators. 3-year results from the COMPARE-ABSORB trial. Presented at virtual CRT 2021, March 13, 2021. https://www.cerc-europe.org/wp-content/uploads/CRT-2021_COMPARE-ABSORB_final-1.pdf.