Search

Due to expansion limits of the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold a meticulous implantation with correct sizing is required. We sought to investigate the clinical outcomes based on the sizing of the device related to the maximal lumen diameter measured by quantitative coronary angiography in Absorb BVS and Xience EES treated lesions in the AIDA trial. Sizing of Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and Xience everolimus eluting stent (EES) was graded according to the definitions of device non-oversize and device oversize on pre-procedural angiography. Lesion-oriented outcomes (LOCE) (device thrombosis, TLR and TVMI) that occurred during 2 years follow-up were related to device non-oversized or oversized status. In the Absorb BVS group, LOCE occurred in 48 (7.4%) lesions in the oversized group and in 32 (8.2%) lesions in the non-oversized group (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.58-1.42; p = 0.681), whereas TLR occurred in 34 (5.3%) lesions and in 23 lesions (5.9%), respectively (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.52-1.51; p = 0.666). Definite scaffold thrombosis occurred in 11 (1.7%) device oversized treated lesions against 16 (4.1%) device non-oversized treated lesions (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.89; p = 0.020). There were no differences in event rates between oversized and non-oversized groups in lesions treated with Xience EES. There was no significant difference in LOCE between oversized and non-oversized treated Absorb BVS and Xience EES treated lesions. Non-oversized Absorb BVS implantation was associated with a higher risk of scaffold thrombosis at complete 2 years follow-up. The majority of very late scaffold thrombosis occurred in properly sized devices.

According to the 2011 Dutch guideline on Cardiovascular risk management 1 in 5 hypertensive patients are eligible for blood pressure lowering treatment. The Dutch guideline recommends striving for a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of < 140 mmHg in adult patients who have no cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus, while the recent American guideline now recommends an SBP target value of < 130 mmHg for all adult patients. An important reason for using a stricter SBP target value are the results of randomised studies and meta-analyses that looked at the effect of intensive antihypertensive therapy on the risk of mortality and cardiovascular disease. Based on the literature, there appears to be sufficient evidence that intensive antihypertensive therapy (SBP target value of < 130 mmHg) is useful in patients with cardiovascular disease and in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Currently, there is insufficient evidence that intensive antihypertensive therapy is useful in patients who have diabetes mellitus or who are over 80 years old.