Comparison of in vivo acute stent recoil between the bioresorbable everolimus-eluting coronary scaffolds (revision 1.0 and 1.1) and the metallic everolimus-eluting stent

Onuma, Yoshinobu; Serruys, Patrick W; Gomez, Josep; de Bruyne, Bernard; Dudek, Dariusz; Thuesen, Leif; Smits, Peter; Chevalier, Bernard; McClean, Dougal; Koolen, Jacques; Windecker, Stephan; Whitbourn, Robert; Meredith, Ian; Garcia-Garcia, Hector; Ormiston, John A; ABSORB Cohort A and B investigators, (2011). Comparison of in vivo acute stent recoil between the bioresorbable everolimus-eluting coronary scaffolds (revision 1.0 and 1.1) and the metallic everolimus-eluting stent. Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 78(1), pp. 3-12. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley-Blackwell 10.1002/ccd.22864

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

The ABSORB cohort A trial using the bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold (BVS revision 1.0, Abbott Vascular) demonstrated a slightly higher acute recoil with BVS than with metallic stents. To reinforce the mechanical strength of the scaffold, the new BVS scaffold (revision 1.1) with modified strut design was developed and tested in the ABSORB cohort B trial. This study sought to evaluate and compare the in vivo acute scaffold recoil of the BVS revision 1.0 in ABSORB cohort A and the BVS revision 1.1 in ABSORB cohort B with the historical recoil of the XIENCE V® everolimus-eluting metal stent (EES, SPIRIT I and II).

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Cardiovascular Disorders (DHGE) > Clinic of Cardiology

UniBE Contributor:

Windecker, Stephan

ISSN:

1522-1946

Publisher:

Wiley-Blackwell

Language:

English

Submitter:

Factscience Import

Date Deposited:

04 Oct 2013 14:21

Last Modified:

17 Mar 2015 19:29

Publisher DOI:

10.1002/ccd.22864

PubMed ID:

21413120

Web of Science ID:

000292094800002

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/7232 (FactScience: 212420)

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback