Vascular response to everolimus- and biolimus-eluting coronary stents versus everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffolds--an optical coherence tomography substudy of the EVERBIO II trial.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: Head-to-head optical coherence tomography (OCT) data comparing metallic stents with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) are lacking. This study assessed vascular healing at 9-month follow-up after implantation of everolimus- and biolimus-eluting stents (EES; BES) and everolimus-eluting BVS. METHODS: OCT was performed in 74 patients enrolled in the EVERBIO II (NCT01711931) trial (23 with EES: 26 lesions, 7 625 struts; 23 with BES: 26 lesions, 6 140 struts; 28 with BVS: 33 lesions, 10 891 struts). OCT images were acquired using the pullback and nonocclusive flushing technique and analysed offline. RESULTS: BVS demonstrated fewer uncovered struts per patient (12 ± 27 [3.8 ± 8.4%] vs 59 ± 55 [21.8 ± 13.7%] in the EES&BES group, p <0.001), and thicker neointimal hyperplasia (BVS 102 ± 44 µm vs EES&BES 66 ± 36 µm, p <0.01). There was no significant difference with regard to malapposed struts (2.1 ± 2.7% in the BVS vs 4.4 ± 8.8% in the EES&BES group, p = 0.41). In a predefined signal intensity scale, quantitative analysis of the "key component" (black) revealed lower intensity in BVS than EES&BES (14 ± 23% vs 13 ± 12%, p = 0.007). Intensity was lower in polylactide-containing stents (BVS&BES) than in EES (15 ± 19% vs 10 ± 10%, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: BVS has fewer uncovered struts and presents with a thicker neointimal coverage compared with EES&BES. It is not known whether this improved capping correlates with superior vascular healing. Polylactide-containing stents (BVS and BES) demonstrate lower peristrut intensity compared with EES.

[Diabetes mellitus and the era of telemedicine]. / Le diabète et l'ère de la télémédecine.

Diabetes is one of the chronic diseases targeted by telemedicine applications. The remote monitoring of important physiological values may help lessen health care costs and has the potential for improving care for diabetes patients. A significant decrease in HbA1c levels through the use of telemedicine when compared to standard treatment has previously been postulated. However, the technology's impact on clinical events or cost-effectiveness is not yet clarified. Even though telemedicine harbors the potential of improving care in diabetic patients, some detrimental effects may accompany its implementation. The alteration of the communication between patients and caregivers may adversely affect the therapeutic relationship which is a cornerstone of diabetes treatment.