4.3 Article

Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes With a Novel Radiopaque Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold The FANTOM II Study

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007283

关键词

coronary artery disease; coronary stenosis; drug-eluting stents; sirolimus; stent

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: A novel bioresorbable scaffold, the sirolimus-eluting Fantom, incorporates a radiopaque polymer, struts with a thickness of 125 mu m, and a crossing profile of 1.35 mm. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 9-month angiographic and 12-month clinical outcomes of the FANTOM scaffold in a larger patient population. METHODS AND RESULTS: The FANTOM II study (Safety & Performance Study of the Fantom Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold - First Report on Initial 24 Month Outcomes) was a prospective, multicenter trial which enrolled 240 patients with single de novo coronary stenosis with reference vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.5 mm diameter and lesion length <= 20 mm. Major adverse cardiac events through 12-month follow-up were assessed. Angiographic follow-up was performed in consecutive patient cohorts at 6 months (n=117) and 9 months (n=123). Acute delivery success, acute technical success, acute procedural success, and clinical procedural success rates as defined in the clinical protocol were 97.9% (235/240), 95.8% (230/240), 99.1% (228/230), and 99.6% (227/228), respectively. The mean in-stent late lumen loss at 6 months and 9 months were 0.25 +/- 0.40 mm and 0.33 +/- 0.36 mm, respectively, and in-segment binary restenosis occurred in 2.0% and 7.6% of patients, respectively. Major adverse cardiac events and target lesion failure through 12 months occurred in 4.2% of 240 patients; scaffold thrombosis developed in only one patient (0.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The Fantom sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable coronary scaffold demonstrated favorable safety and effectiveness performance at 12-month follow-up. Longer-term follow-up is ongoing to examine the late outcomes with this novel device.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据