Affiliation:
1. Department of Internal Medicine, Addenbrooke\'s Hospital, Cambridge, England
2. Brighton and Sussex Medical
School, Brighton, England
Abstract
Introduction:
Coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL) are one fifth of all coronary lesions
and they do not have an optimal strategy for stenting yet. Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) are novel
inventions proposed to be the optimal solution. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the
role of BRS in treating CBL by comparing it to dedicated bifurcation stents (DBS).
Methods:
A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines, searching databases
such as ScienceDirect, EMBASE, MEDLINE, NIH, TRIP, PUBMED, and ClinicalTrials.
gov. The risk of bias was assessed by MINORS and modified Cowley’s criteria. Q statistic was
used for heterogeneity testing and a meta-analysis was conducted using the “meta” package in the
R software application.
Results:
Fourteen studies were included with an average follow-up period of twelve months. Almost
80% of the participants were male (p-value= 0.148) and around two-thirds were smokers.
Meta-analysis was performed for myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularisation (TLR),
major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and stent thrombosis (ST). These showed statistically nonsignificant
differences, with a slight trend favouring BRS except with stent thrombosis.
Conclusion::
There is a lack of randomised trials on the topic, which may be an area for further research.
But the results showed favourable yet statistically insignificant outcomes for BRS except
for ST, an issue that can be addressed with technological advancement.
Publisher
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
Subject
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,General Medicine