Bioresorbable Scaffolds (BRS): A Ten-Year Saga Turned Sour

Authors

  • Antonis S Manolis Third Department of Cardiology, Athens University School of Medicine, Athens, Greece

Keywords:

bioresorbable vascular scaffolds, coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndromes, coronary stents, scaffold thrombosis, stent thrombosis, adverse cardiovascular events

Abstract

The first generation bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) did not deliver their promise for reduced risk of late stent thrombosis and neoatherosclerosis forming inside the stent and restoration of endothelial vasomotion. To our chagrin, the incidence of early, late and very late scaffold thrombosis was higher than conventional metallic stents leading to increased rates of adverse cardiovascular events and outcomes. Unfortunately, it took a decade to fully appreciate these major drawbacks. The manufacturer of the first, apparently hastily approved BRS in both Europe and the USA discontinued its production in September 2017. Nevertheless, hope remains and newer generation BRS are already in the pipeline expecting that improved technology and implantation strategies may overcome these severe limitations and finally recredit and reinstate the BRS concept. Rhythmos 2018;13(2): 26-29.

Downloads

Published

2018-04-07

Issue

Vol. 13 No. 2 (2018)

Section

Editorial

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).