-
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jun 2023To answer the following PICOS question: "In patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with adjunctive systemic or local antimicrobials, in... (Review)
Review
AIM
To answer the following PICOS question: "In patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with adjunctive systemic or local antimicrobials, in comparison with surgical therapy alone, in terms of pocket probing depth reduction, as assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 6 months of follow-up?"
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted. Reduction in mean probing pocket depth (PPD) was the primary outcome. Secondary clinical outcomes were changes in suppuration (%), changes in bleeding on probing (BOP) (%), marginal bone level changes (mm), disease resolution (%), and implant/prosthesis loss (%). Patient-reported outcome measures, possible adverse effects, and oral-health-related quality of life were also extracted if such data were available.
RESULTS
Four RCTs assessing the use of locally (two RCTs) and systemically (two RCTs) administered antimicrobial adjuncts to surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, with 6-36-month follow-up, were included. Because of the substantial heterogeneity of interventions between the studies, meta-analysis could not be performed. A reduction in the mean PPD was observed following all the involved surgical treatments, irrespective of the addition of antimicrobials. Except for the effect of systemic antimicrobials on marginal bone level changes and local antimicrobials on BOP, the effect of systemic and local antimicrobials was equivocal for all secondary outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the limited available evidence, the adjunctive use of the currently tested systemic or local antimicrobials during surgical therapy, in comparison with surgical therapy alone, in patients with peri-implantitis does not seem to improve the clinical efficacy. With regard the use of systemic antimicrobials, only 50% of the cases showed disease resolution after 1 year. There is a lack of studies that consider the sole use of local antimicrobials. Therefore, their true effect remains unclear.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Treatment Outcome; Dental Implants
PubMed: 36644805
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13773 -
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy Feb 2022The NIA-AA research framework proposes a purely biological definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD). This implies that AD can be diagnosed based on biomarker...
BACKGROUND
The NIA-AA research framework proposes a purely biological definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD). This implies that AD can be diagnosed based on biomarker abnormalities, irrespective of clinical manifestation. While this brings opportunities, it also raises challenges. We aimed to provide an overview of considerations regarding the disclosure of AD pathology before the onset of dementia.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection (on 10 December 2020) for references on conveying AD biomarker results to individuals without dementia. Our query combined variations on the terms Alzheimer's disease, disclosure, or diagnosis, preclinical or prodromal, and biomarkers. Two reviewers independently screened the resulting 6860 titles and abstracts for eligibility and examined 162 full-text records for relevance. We included theoretical articles in English, on communicating amyloid and/or tau results to individuals with mild cognitive impairment, subjective cognitive decline, or normal cognition. MAXQDA-software was used for inductive data analysis.
RESULTS
We included 27 publications. From these, we extracted 26 unique considerations, which we grouped according to their primary relevance to a clinical, personal, or societal context. Clinical considerations included (lack of) validity, utility, and disclosure protocols. Personal considerations covered psychological and behavioral implications, as well as the right to (not) know. Finally, societal considerations comprised the risk of misconception, stigmatization, and discrimination. Overall, views were heterogeneous and often contradictory, with emphasis on harmful effects.
CONCLUSIONS
We found 26 diverse and opposing considerations, related to a clinical, personal, or societal context, which are relevant to diagnosing AD before dementia. The theoretical literature tended to focus on adverse impact and rely on common morality, while the motivation for and implications of biomarker testing are deeply personal. Our findings provide a starting point for clinicians to discuss biomarker-based diagnosis with their patients, which will become even more relevant in light of the conditional approval of a first disease-modifying drug for AD.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid; Biomarkers; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Disease Progression; Humans
PubMed: 35144684
DOI: 10.1186/s13195-022-00971-3 -
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery May 2023Collagen and human amniotic membrane (hAM) are Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved biomaterials that can be used as nerve wraps or conduits for repair of...
BACKGROUND
Collagen and human amniotic membrane (hAM) are Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved biomaterials that can be used as nerve wraps or conduits for repair of peripheral nerve injuries. Both biomaterials have been shown to reduce scarring and fibrosis of injured peripheral nerves. However, comparative advantages and disadvantages have not been definitively shown in the literature. The purpose of this systematic review is to comprehensively evaluate the literature regarding the roles of hAM and collagen nerve wraps and conduits on peripheral nerve regeneration in preclinical models.
METHODS
The MEDLINE database was queried using the PubMed search engine on July 7, 2019, with the following search strategy: ("amniotic membrane" OR "amnion") OR ("collagen conduit" OR "nerve wrap")] AND "nerve." All resulting articles were screened by two independent reviewers. Nerve type, lesion type/injury model, repair type, treatment, and outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS
Two hundred and fifty-eight articles were identified, and 44 studies remained after application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Seventeen studies utilized hAM, whereas 27 studies utilized collagen wraps or conduits. Twenty-three (85%) of the collagen studies utilized conduits, and four (15%) utilized wraps. Six (35%) of the hAM studies utilized conduits and 11 (65%) utilized wraps. Two (9%) collagen studies involving a conduit and one (25%) involving a wrap demonstrated at least one significant improvement in outcomes compared with a control. While none of the hAM conduit studies showed significant improvements, eight (73%) of the studies investigating hAM wraps showed at least one significant improvement in outcomes.
CONCLUSION
The majority of studies reported positive outcomes, indicating that collagen and hAM nerve wraps and conduits both have the potential to enhance peripheral nerve regeneration. However, relatively few studies reported significant findings, except for studies evaluating hAM wraps. Preclinical models may help guide clinical practice regarding applications of these biomaterials in peripheral nerve repair.
Topics: Humans; Collagen; Peripheral Nerves; Prostheses and Implants; Peripheral Nerve Injuries; Biocompatible Materials; Nerve Regeneration
PubMed: 35008116
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1732432 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2020Diabetic macular edema (DME) is secondary to leakage from diseased retinal capillaries with thickening of central retina, and is an important cause of poor central... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Diabetic macular edema (DME) is secondary to leakage from diseased retinal capillaries with thickening of central retina, and is an important cause of poor central visual acuity in people with diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal steroids have been used to reduce retinal thickness and improve vision in people with DME.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal steroid therapy compared with other treatments for DME.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase on 15 May, 2019. We also searched reference lists, Science Citation Index, conference proceedings, and relevant trial registers. We conducted a top up search on 21 October, 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of intravitreal steroids as monotherapy against any other intervention (e.g. observation, laser photocoagulation, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (antiVEGF) for DME.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analyses.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 trials (4348 participants, 4505 eyes). These trials compared intravitreal steroid therapies versus other treatments, including intravitreal antiVEGF therapy, laser photocoagulation, and sham injection. Most trials had an overall unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (701 eyes ) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with sham. We found moderate-certainty evidence that dexamethasone leads to slightly more improvement of visual acuity than sham at 12 months (mean difference [MD] -0.08 logMAR, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.12 to -0.05 logMAR). Regarding improvement of three or more lines of visual acuity, there was moderate-certainty evidence in favor of dexamethasone at 12 months, but the CI covered the null value (risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.12). Regarding adverse events, dexamethasone increased by about four times the risk of cataract progression and the risk of using intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering medications compared to sham (RR 3.89, 95% CI 2.75 to 5.50 and RR 4.54, 95% CI 3.19 to 6.46, respectively; moderate-certainty evidence); about 4 in 10 participants treated with dexamethasone needed IOP-lowering medications. Two trials (451 eyes) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab and ranibizumab). There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly less with dexamethasone compared with antiVEGF at 12 months (MD 0.07 logMAR, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.09 logMAR; 2 trials; 451 participants/eyes; I = 0%). The RR of gain of three or more lines of visual acuity was inconsistent between trials, with one trial finding no evidence of a difference between dexamethasone and bevacizumab at 12 months (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.40; 1 trial; 88 eyes), and the other, larger trial finding the chances of vision gain were half with dexamethasone compared with ranibizumab (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.79; 1 trial; 432 participants). The certainty of evidence was low. Cataract progression and the need for IOP-lowering medications increased more than 4 times with dexamethasone implant compared to antiVEGF (moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (560 eyes) compared intravitreal fluocinolone implant 0.19mg with sham. There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly more with fluocinolone at 12 months (MD -0.04 logMAR, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01 logMAR). There was moderate-certainty evidence that an improvement in visual acuity of three or more lines was more common with fluocinolone than with sham at 12 months (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.78). Fluocinolone also increased the risk of cataract progression (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.97; participants = 335; moderate-certainty evidence), which occurred in about 8 in 10 participants, and the use of IOP-lowering medications (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.98; participants = 558; moderate-certainty evidence), which were needed in 2 to 3 out of 10 participants. One small trial with 43 participants (69 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4 mg with sham. There may be a benefit in visual acuity at 24 months (MD -0.11 logMAR, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.03 logMAR), but the certainty of evidence is low. Differences in adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Two trials (615 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with laser photocoagulation and reached discordant results. The smaller trial (31 eyes followed up to 9 months) found more visual acuity improvement with triamcinolone (MD -0.18 logMAR, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07 logMAR), but a larger, multicenter trial (584 eyes, 12-month follow-up) found no evidence of a difference regarding change in visual acuity (MD 0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07 logMAR) or gain of three or more lines of visual acuity (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.30) (overall low-certainty evidence). Cataract progression was about three times more likely (RR 2.68, 95% CI 2.21 to 3.24; moderate-certainty evidence) and the use of IOP-lowering medications was about four times more likely (RR 3.92, 95% CI 2.59 to 5.96; participants = 627; studies = 2; I = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) with triamcinolone. About 1 in 3 participants needed IOP-lowering medication. One small trial (30 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab or ranibizumab). Visual acuity may be worse with triamcinolone at 12 months (MD 0.18 logMAR, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.26 logMAR); the certainty of evidence is low. Adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Four trials reported data on pseudophakic participants, for whom cataract is not a concern. These trials found no decrease in visual acuity in the second treatment year due to cataract progression.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Intravitreal steroids may improve vision in people with DME compared to sham or control. Effects were small, about one line of vision or less in most comparisons. More evidence is available for dexamethasone or fluocinolone implants when compared to sham, and the evidence is limited and inconsistent for the comparison of dexamethasone with antiVEGF treatment. Any benefits should be weighed against IOP elevation, the use of IOP-lowering medication and, in phakic patients, the progression of cataract. The need for glaucoma surgery is also increased, but remains rare.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Bevacizumab; Bias; Confidence Intervals; Dexamethasone; Diabetic Retinopathy; Drug Implants; Fluocinolone Acetonide; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Macular Edema; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ranibizumab; Steroids; Triamcinolone; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Visual Acuity; Vitreous Body
PubMed: 33206392
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005656.pub3 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jul 2020Since silicone breast implants were introduced to the market several decades ago, the safety of breast implants has remained controversial. Recently, several studies...
Since silicone breast implants were introduced to the market several decades ago, the safety of breast implants has remained controversial. Recently, several studies have explored breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) and breast implant illness (BII). Several countries have developed national breast implant registries to improve the safety and quality of breast implant surgery. We performed a systematic review of the current status of national breast implant registries and propose a pilot form of an appropriate breast implant registry model for Korea. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the "preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) pro forma". PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify all articles containing information on national breast implant registries. We limited the search to articles written in the English language from 2010 to 2020. Articles were reviewed by two independent authors. A total of 63 articles related to national breast implant registries, registry principles and national breast implant registry annual reports were identified. After reviewing the literature, 25 national breast implant registry-related articles were included in the full-text synthesis. Currently, four countries, The Netherlands, Australia, Sweden, and the UK, have breast implant registries with well-formed sources for big data. Overall, similarities in data points were detected for three categories: implant-related complications, operation details, and device information. However, there were differences for each registry in terms of governance, funding, and capture rate. After reviewing other countries' experiences, tentative datasets for the Korean Breast Implant Registry (K-BIR) were developed. The K-BIR can improve the quality of breast implant surgery in Korea by providing datasets on overall processes and outcome measures with quality indicators and risk adjustment factors. This approach will register characteristics of patients and monitor breast implants, complications, and surgical procedures to improve the outcomes of breast implant surgery in Korea. In addition, it can be used as a track-and-trace system with automated notifications to patients in the event of a product recall or other safety concerns related to a specific type of implant.
Topics: Adult; Australia; Austria; Breast Implantation; Breast Implants; Equipment and Supplies; Female; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Registries; Treatment Outcome; United States
PubMed: 32718052
DOI: 10.3390/medicina56080370 -
Clinical Oral Investigations May 2021To evaluate the clinical efficacy of various analgesic medications in mitigating orofacial pain following dental implant surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the clinical efficacy of various analgesic medications in mitigating orofacial pain following dental implant surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was conducted to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes examined were post-operative pain (POP) and consumption of rescue analgesics following implant placement; secondary outcomes included adverse effects, post-operative inflammation, infection, swelling, bleeding, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. Random effects meta-analysis was conducted for risk ratios of dichotomous data.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Individual studies and meta-analysis of two studies indicated that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) significantly reduced POP and consumption of rescue analgesics after dental implant placement compared to placebo. Transdermal administration of NSAIDs may be superior to the oral route as it was similarly effective for POP control and resulted in fewer side effects. Glucocorticoids administered as primary analgesics or NSAID adjuvants resulted in comparable pain sensation compared to NSAIDs alone. Caffeine-containing analgesics were reported as acceptable and effective for the treatment of POP and swelling when compared to codeine adjuvants. With regard to analgesic dosing schedules, pain modulation may be most critical during the first 72 h following dental implant placement. Risk of bias assessment indicated an overall low risk of bias across the included trials.
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of this review, POP following implant surgery may be effectively treated with the short-term use of analgesic medications. However, given the heterogeneity in the available RCTs, there is insufficient evidence to recommend an analgesic regimen following dental implant surgery.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Short-term use of analgesic medications may be sufficient for post-operative pain management in dental implant surgery. Ultimately, the clinician's analgesic prescription should be directed by a patient's medical history, in order to increase the success of pain management in a short period of time and decrease potential adverse effects.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CRD42018099324.
Topics: Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Dental Implants; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33839939
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-03859-y -
Contraception May 2024To summarize and update information regarding drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between antiretrovirals (ARVs) and hormonal contraceptives (HCs). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To summarize and update information regarding drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between antiretrovirals (ARVs) and hormonal contraceptives (HCs).
DESIGN
Systematic review METHODS: We searched seven databases for peer-reviewed publications from January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2023, including studies of women using ARVs and HCs concurrently with outcomes including therapeutic effectiveness or toxicity, pharmacokinetics (PK), or pharmacodynamics. We summarized findings and used checklists to assess evidence quality.
RESULTS
We included 49 articles, with clinical, ARV or HC PK outcomes reported by 39, 25, and 30 articles, respectively, with some articles reporting outcomes in two or more categories. Fifteen of 18 articles assessing DDIs between efavirenz and progestin implants, emergency contraception, or combined hormonal intravaginal rings found higher pregnancy rates, luteal progesterone levels suggesting ovulation, or reduced progestin PK values. Five studies documented that CYP2B6 single nucleotide polymorphisms exacerbated this DDI. One cohort detected doubled bone density loss with concomitant depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-containing ART use versus TDF alone. No other studies described DDIs impacting clinical outcomes. Few adverse events were attributed to ARV-HC use with none exceeding Grade 2. Evidence quality was generally moderate, with dis-similar treatment and control groups, identifying and controlling for confounding, and minimizing attrition bias in the study design being the most frequent limitations.
CONCLUSION
Most ARVs and HCs may be used safely and effectively together. TDF-DMPA DDIs warrant longer-term study on bone health and consideration of alternate combinations. For efavirenz-based ART, client counselling on relative risks, including both potential increase in pregnancy rate with concomitant efavirenz and implant use and lower pregnancy rates compared to other HCs even with concomitant efavirenz use, should continue to allow users comprehensive method choice.
PubMed: 38762199
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110490 -
Endocrine, Metabolic & Immune Disorders... 2023Osseo-integrated implants provide effective treatment results for edentulous patients. However, despite the high success and survival rates of dental implants, several...
BACKGROUND
Osseo-integrated implants provide effective treatment results for edentulous patients. However, despite the high success and survival rates of dental implants, several factors, such as poor oral hygiene and a history of periodontal disease, and systemic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus, could influence the outcome of the treatment. In fact, poor glycemic control can affect the healing process. Diabetes mellitus is considered a relative contraindication for dental implant therapy due to the fact that the success rates of the implants seem to be lower in diabetic patients, even if there is no total agreement among the results reported in the literature. The analysis of peri-implant inflammation indices, bone loss around the implant and glycemic index can provide us with useful information on the relationship between glycaemia in diabetic patients and the course of peri-implantitis, as well as implant success in the short term.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this review is to establish how peri-implant inflammation parameters vary in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients.
METHODS
This review was conducted on the basis of PRISMA. The search was conducted by three independent reviewers searching for keywords in three databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web Of Sciences (WOS), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial.
RESULTS
A total of 1159 records were identified, and 11 articles were included in the qualitative analysis.
CONCLUSION
The analysis of the extracted data from the included studies suggests that some periimplant inflammation indices, such as bleeding on probing and bone loss around the implant, appear to be increased in diabetic patients with glycometabolic decompensation, compared with control not affected by diabetes mellitus.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Diabetes Mellitus; Inflammation; Hyperglycemia; Glycemic Index
PubMed: 36281861
DOI: 10.2174/1871530323666221021100427 -
Dental Materials : Official Publication... Jun 2024Nanotechnology is constantly advancing in dental science, progressing several features aimed at improving dental implants. An alternative for surface treatment of dental... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Nanotechnology is constantly advancing in dental science, progressing several features aimed at improving dental implants. An alternative for surface treatment of dental implants is electrochemical anodization, which may generate a nanotubular surface (TiO nanotubes) with antibacterial potential and osteoinductive features. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to elucidate the possible antibacterial properties of the surface in question compared to the untreated titanium surface.
SOURCES
For that purpose, was performed a systematic search on the bases PubMed, Lilacs, Embase, Web Of Science, Cinahl, and Cochrane Central, as well as, manual searches and gray literature.
STUDY SELECTION
The searches resulted in 742 articles, of which 156 followed for full-text reading. Then, 37 were included in the systematic review and 8 were included in meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies revealed significant antibacterial protection using TiO nanotube surfaces, while 15 studies found no statistical difference between control and nanotextured surfaces. Meta-analysis of in vitro studies demonstrated relevant bacterial reduction only for studies investigating Staphylococcus aureus in a period of 6 h. Meta-analysis of in vivo studies revealed three times lower bacterial adhesion and proliferation on TiO nanotube surfaces.
CONCLUSIONS
TiO nanotube topography as a surface for dental implants in preclinical research has demonstrated a positive relationship with antibacterial properties, nevertheless, factors such as anodization protocols, bacteria strains, and mono-culture methods should be taken into consideration, consequently, further studies are necessary to promote clinical translatability.
Topics: Titanium; Nanotubes; Dental Implants; Surface Properties; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacterial Adhesion; Humans; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 38714394
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2024.04.009 -
Open Heart Oct 2022Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) were designed to reduce the rate of late adverse events observed in conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) by dissolving once they... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) were designed to reduce the rate of late adverse events observed in conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) by dissolving once they have restored lasting patency.
OBJECTIVES
Compare the safety and efficacy of BVS versus DES in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery disease across a complete range of randomised controlled trial (RCT) follow-up intervals.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched from inception through 5 January 2022 for RCTs comparing the clinical outcomes of BVS versus DES. The primary safety outcome was stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST), and the primary efficacy outcome was target lesion failure (TLF: composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (ID-TLR)). Secondary outcomes were patient-oriented composite endpoint (combining all-death, all-MI and all-revascularisation), its individual components and those of TLF. Studies were appraised using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan V.5.4.
RESULTS
11 919 patients were randomised to receive either BVS (n=6438) or DES (n=5481) across 17 trials (differing follow-up intervals from 3 months to 5 years). BVS demonstrated increased risk of ST across all timepoints (peaking at 2 years with risk ratio (RR): 3.47; 95% CI 1.80 to 6.70; p=0.0002). Similarly, they showed increased risk of TLF (peaking at 3 years, RR: 1.35; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.70; p=0.01) resulting from high rates of TVMI and ID-TLR. Though improvements were observed after device dissolution (5-year follow-up), these were non-significant. All other outcomes were statistically equivalent. Applicability to all BVS is limited by 91% of the BVS group receiving Abbott's Absorb.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis demonstrates that current BVS are inferior to contemporary DES throughout the first 5 years at minimum.
Topics: Humans; Drug-Eluting Stents; Absorbable Implants; Treatment Outcome; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Coronary Artery Disease; Myocardial Infarction; Thrombosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36288820
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002107