A Meta-analysis Of ABSORB~TM Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Metallic Drug-eluting Stent In Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

Background:Coronary artery disease (CAD), a large health threat, is the most common cause of death worldwide according to WHO data and statistics. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a major treatment of CAD, has made huge progress in the past30years. Bioresorbable scaffold (BRS), which was designed to improve limitations of commonly used metallic drug-eluting stent (DES) and offer CAD patients more options, has become a popular research topic and brought4th revolution in interventional cardiology. ABSORBTM bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS), developed by Abbott Vascular Company and approved by CE mark, is the most commonly studied BRS. Currently, there is lack of meta-analysis of BRS. This article systemically investigates the safety and efficacy of ABSORBTM BVS used in patients with CAD.Objectives:Collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing ABSORBTM BVS versus DES in CAD patients. A meta-analysis and systemic review was conducted to investigate the safety and efficacy of ABSORBTM BVS used in patients with CAD. Methods:RCTs and cohort studies comparing ABSORBTM BVS versus DES in CAD patients were searched. The data and major outcomes of our study include all cause deaths rate, cardiac deaths rate, myocardial infarction (MI) rate, stent thrombosis (ST) rate, target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate, target vessel revascularization (TVR) rate, revascularization rate and all the composite endpoints (target vessel failure, target lesion failure, major adverse cardiac events, patient-oriented composite endpoint) rates. The STATA12.0for meta-analysis is the software applied in this study.Results:Up to April10,2015,2RCTs and5cohort studies were included in our meta-analysis.2109patients were enrolled, with1127in BVS group and982in DES group. Our result showed that in1-year follow-up, there were no differences in all cause deaths rate, cardiac deaths rate, ST rate, TLR rate, TVR rate, revascularization rate and all the composite endpoints (target vessel failure, target lesion failure, major adverse cardiac events, patient-oriented composite endpoint) rates between2groups. But MI rate was higher in BVS group.Conclusions:The safety and efficacy of ABSORBTM BVS is not inferior to drug-eluting stent when used in patients with coronary artery disease. More studies are needed to confirm our conclusion.