Explore the most recent editions of MPO Magazine, featuring expert commentary, industry trends, and breakthrough technologies.
Access the full digital version of MPO Magazine anytime, anywhere, with interactive content and enhanced features.
Join our community of medical device professionals. Subscribe to MPO Magazine for the latest news and updates delivered straight to your mailbox.
Explore the transformative impact of additive manufacturing on medical devices, including design flexibility and materials.
Learn about outsourcing options in the medical device sector, focusing on quality, compliance, and operational excellence.
Stay updated on the latest electronic components and technologies driving innovation in medical devices.
Discover precision machining and laser processing solutions that enhance the quality and performance of medical devices.
Explore the latest materials and their applications in medical devices, focusing on performance, biocompatibility, and regulatory compliance.
Learn about advanced molding techniques for producing high-quality, complex medical device components.
Stay informed on best practices for packaging and sterilization methods that ensure product safety and compliance.
Explore the latest trends in research and development, as well as design innovations that drive the medical device industry forward.
Discover the role of software and IT solutions in enhancing the design, functionality, and security of medical devices.
Learn about the essential testing methods and standards that ensure the safety and effectiveness of medical devices.
Stay updated on innovations in tubing and extrusion processes for medical applications, focusing on precision and reliability.
Stay ahead with real-time updates on critical news affecting the medical device industry.
Access unique content and insights not available in the print edition of the MPO Magazine.
Explore feature articles that delve into specific topics within the medical device industry, providing in-depth analysis and insights.
Gain perspective from industry experts through regular columns addressing key challenges and innovations in medical devices.
Read the editor’s thoughts on the current state of the medical device industry.
Discover the leading companies in the medical device sector, showcasing their innovations and contributions to the industry.
Explore detailed profiles of medical device contract manufacturing and service provider companies, highlighting their capabilities and offerings.
Learn about the capabilities of medical device contract manufacturing and service provider companies, showcasing their expertise and resources.
Watch informative videos featuring industry leaders discussing trends, technologies, and insights in medical devices.
Short, engaging videos providing quick insights and updates on key topics within the medical device industry.
Tune in to discussions with industry experts sharing their insights on trends, challenges, and innovations in the medical device sector.
Participate in informative webinars led by industry experts, covering various topics relevant to the medical device sector.
Stay informed on the latest press releases and announcements from leading companies in the medical device manufacturing industry.
Access comprehensive eBooks covering a range of topics on medical device manufacturing, design, and innovation.
Highlighting the innovators and entrepreneurs who are shaping the future of medical technology.
Explore sponsored articles and insights from leading companies in the medical device manufacturing sector.
Read in-depth whitepapers that explore key issues, trends, and research findings for the medical device industry.
Discover major industry events, trade shows, and conferences focused on medical devices and technology.
Get real-time updates and insights live from the CompaMed/Medica conference floor.
Join discussions and networking opportunities at the MPO Medtech Forum, focusing on the latest trends and challenges in the industry.
Attend the MPO Summit for insights and strategies from industry leaders shaping the future of medical devices.
Participate in the ODT Forum, focusing on orthopedic device trends and innovations.
Discover advertising opportunities with MPO to reach a targeted audience of medical device professionals.
Review our editorial guidelines for submissions and contributions to MPO.
Read about our commitment to protecting your privacy and personal information.
Familiarize yourself with the terms and conditions governing the use of MPOmag.com.
What are you searching for?
Device generally comparable with drug-eluting metal stent when placed in appropriately-sized vessels.
March 20, 2017
By: American College of Cardiology
Patients receiving the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS), a dissolving stent to open clogged vessels around the heart, showed outcomes comparable with patients receiving the Xience drug-eluting metal stent between years one and two. However, patients receiving Absorb BVS faced an overall elevated risk of adverse outcomes at two years compared with patients receiving metal stents, a difference that appears to be attributable to the stent being placed in vessels that were smaller than recommended, according to a study presented at the American College of Cardiology’s 66th Annual Scientific Session. “A key take-home is that this device shouldn’t be used in very small vessels,” said Stephen Ellis, MD, a cardiologist at Cleveland Clinic, and the study’s lead author. “This isn’t necessarily surprising because the Absorb BVS is considerably larger than the Xience stent, but it would have been preferable to have more consistency with regard to the vessel sizing and utilization of the device in the study.” Current U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) instructions for the Absorb BVS recommend avoiding its use in small vessels; the study was conducted before this guidance and updated implantation techniques were in place. Previously-reported year one results showed Absorb BVS to be non-inferior to metal stents in terms of the trial’s primary endpoint—target lesion failure as measured by a composite of cardiac death, target lesion heart attack and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at one year. The new results show that non-inferiority was retained for the span between years one and two, but that at the end of year two patients receiving Absorb BVS showed a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure. However, inconsistencies with regard to adherence to study protocols and the procedural techniques used to place the device appear to account for some adverse outcomes, researchers said. They report sub-analyses suggesting that proper use and placement of the device reduces the differences in outcomes between Absorb BVS and the metal stent at two years to a non-significant level. “These results show that this device is generally comparable with the drug-eluting metal stent when the device is placed in appropriately-sized vessels and placed using appropriate procedural techniques,” Ellis said. Stents are used to open vessels that have become clogged with plaque, allowing blood to flow freely. The trial is the largest to assess long-term outcomes from the Absorb BVS, which is the first stent designed to fully dissolve after being placed in a heart vessel. The researchers cautioned that, although they offer important insights, the trial’s two-year results cannot definitively show whether the dissolving scaffold reduces long-term adverse events compared with a permanent metal stent because the scaffold is not yet fully dissolved in most patients until year three. “The value proposition of the Absorb BVS is that once the device is fully dissolved after three years there will be better long-term outcomes, but there are as of yet no long-term, large studies available to show that,” Ellis said. The trial, called ABSORB III, enrolled 2,008 patients treated at 193 centers, primarily in the United States. Patients had up to two areas of significant plaque buildup in separate vessels and were randomized to receive either the Absorb BVS (1,322 patients) or the Xience stent (686 patients). Both stents gradually release everolimus, a drug to prevent tissue from growing within the stent. Between years one and two, target lesion failure occurred in 3.7 percent of patients receiving Absorb BVS and 2.6 percent of patients receiving the Xience stent, a difference that was not statistically significant. At the end of two years, target lesion failure had occurred in a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving Absorb BVS (10.9 percent) than patients receiving Xience (7.8 percent). This difference was largely driven by target vessel heart attack, which occurred in 7.3 percent of patients receiving Absorb BVS and 4.9 percent of patients receiving Xience. The risks of cardiac death, ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization and development of blood clots (thrombosis) around the stent were not significantly different between the two study arms. The trial’s protocols specified that only vessels 2.5-3.75 millimeters in diameter should be included in the study. However, the protocols allowed clinicians to assess vessel size based on visual assessment from a coronary angiogram, which is less precise than a method known as quantitative coronary analysis. As a result, 19 percent of patients included in the trial received treatment for vessels that were smaller than is currently recommended (less than 2.25 millimeters as measured by quantitative coronary analysis, which equates to roughly 2.5 millimeters as assessed visually). These patients had significantly poorer outcomes than those whose treated vessels were at least 2.5 millimeters in diameter, and a sub-analysis excluding these patients showed Absorb BVS to be no longer significantly worse than metal stents at two years in terms of target lesion failure. In addition, the original study protocols did not specify the use of certain procedural techniques that have since been shown to improve outcomes with the Absorb BVS. A separate trial, ABSORB IV, is currently enrolling patients for further insights on outcomes from the use of Absorb BVS. A preliminary analysis from Absorb IV, which includes refined procedural techniques and stricter adherence to recommendations with regard to vessel size, suggests proper use and placement of the Absorb BVS may be associated with a considerable reduction in risk. In collaboration with FDA, a landmark analysis combining Absorb III and Absorb IV has been extended to further evaluate the effectiveness and short- and long-term benefits of Absorb BVS. The landmark analysis will start three years after device implantation, when the BVS is expected to be fully absorbed, and will follow patients for an additional four to seven years. ABSORB III is funded by Abbott Laboratories.
Enter your account email.
A verification code was sent to your email, Enter the 6-digit code sent to your mail.
Didn't get the code? Check your spam folder or resend code
Set a new password for signing in and accessing your data.
Your Password has been Updated !