Comparison of the SYNERGY with the PROMUS (XIENCE V) and bare metal and polymer-only Element control stents in porcine coronary arteries.

Autor:	Wilson GJ; Division of Pathology, Department of Paediatric Laboratory Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada. gregory.wilson@sickkids.ca, Huibregtse BA, Pennington DE, Dawkins KD
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology [EuroIntervention] 2012 Jun 20; Vol. 8 (2), pp. 250-7.
DOI:	10.4244/EIJV8I2A39
Abstrakt:	Aims: This study evaluated vascular compatibility of the novel platinum chromium alloy Element stent platform delivering abluminal everolimus from a poly-lactide-co-glycolide bioabsorbable polymer (SYNERGY stent), currently undergoing clinical trial, compared with the PROMUS (XIENCE V) and bare metal and polymer-only Element stents. Methods and Results: Stents (n=161) were implanted one per coronary artery in 72 swine at a stent-to-artery ratio of 1.1:1. Similar numbers of each device group were explanted at each of 30, 90, 180, and 360 days (except no PROMUS (XIENCE V) stent at 360 days) for pathological analysis. There was no stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, or strut fractures in any group. Vascular response was similar between the SYNERGY and PROMUS (XIENCE V) stents, with no thrombi and complete endothelialisation on both scanning electron microscopy and histology at 30, 90 and 180 days. There were no significant differences for the morphologic parameters of luminal thrombus, endothelial cell coverage, strut tissue coverage, inflammation, internal elastic lamina (IEL) disruption, external elastic lamina (EEL) disruption and medial smooth muscle cell loss across device groups or between time points, but there was mild but greater (p<0.0001) para-strut fibrin at 30 days for both drug-eluting stents (DES) compared with the bare and polymer-only controls; this difference completely dissipated by 90 days. Inflammation was predominantly minimal to mild for all device types. No morphometric parameters, including intimal thickness, stent profile-based area stenosis, and EEL area were significantly different when comparing the SYNERGY stent with the bare metal Element and polymer-only Element control stents at 90, 180 and 360 days. Conclusions: In this non-injured porcine coronary artery model, the bioabsorbable polymer SYNERGY stent demonstrated vascular compatibility equivalent to the PROMUS (XIENCE V) stent and to the bare metal and polymer-only Element stents.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu