Author + information
- Received October 25, 2016
- Revision received December 5, 2016
- Accepted December 29, 2016
- Published online March 20, 2017.
- Akihito Tanaka, MDa,b,
- Richard J. Jabbour, MDa,b,c,
- Satoru Mitomo, MDa,b,
- Azeem Latib, MDa,b and
- Antonio Colombo, MDa,b,∗ ()
- aInterventional Cardiology Unit, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus, Milan, Italy
- bInterventional Cardiology Unit, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
- cDepartment of Cardiology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- ↵∗Address for correspondence:
Dr. Antonio Colombo, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus, 48 Via M. Buonarroti, Milan 20145, Italy.
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have become an attractive option in the percutaneous coronary intervention field due to the potential advantages associated with the complete resorption process that occurs within a few years. However, current-generation BVS have several limitations including thicker struts, reduced radial strength, and limited expansion capability when compared with drug-eluting stents (DES). As a result, complex coronary disease often contains BVS-inappropriate/unfavorable segments. This does not necessarily mean that BVS use must be completely avoided, and minimizing the length of permanent metallic caging may still be advantageous. Operators should fully understand the limitations of current BVS, and when to consider a hybrid strategy of BVS in combination with DES or drug-coated balloons.
Dr. Latib serves on the advisory board for Medtronic; and has received speakers honoraria from Abbott Vascular. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
- Received October 25, 2016.
- Revision received December 5, 2016.
- Accepted December 29, 2016.
- 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation