Implante biodegradável de dexametasona para o tratamento do edema macular diabético em maiores de 18 anos, conforme Protocolo Clínico do Ministério da Saúde / Biodegradable dexamethasone implant for the treatment of diabetic macular edema in people over 18 years of age, according to the Clinical Protocol of the Ministry of Health

INTRODUÇÃO: A retinopatia diabética, a principal causa de cegueira em pessoas em idade laboral, é uma manifestação do diabetes na forma de lesão de órgãos-alvo. Clinicamente, as primeiras lesões são anormalidades vasculares como microaneurismas, hemorragias e exsudatos. O aumento da vasopermeabilidade resulta em espessamento da retina e/ou depósitos lipídicos. Quando esses eventos ocorrem na mácula, instala-se o edema macular diabético (EMD), levando ao risco de perda visual central. Dois mecanismos fundamentais estão envolvidos no EMD: angiogênese e inflamação. A angiogênese é secundária ao aumento da expressão de VEGF, principal molécula envolvida na perda da ruptura da barreira hemato-retiniana, que por sua vez causa a exsudação e espessamento macular. A inflamação pode ser causa ou consequência da angiogênese, atualmente considerada fator interdependente. Citocinas encontram-se elevadas em pacientes com retinopatia diabética e EMD, tendo correlação positiva com a severidade da doença ocular. O PCDT atual de retinopatia diabética, publicado pelo Ministério da Saúde, inclui os antiVEGFs ranibizumabe e aflibercepte para pacientes sem tratamento medicamentoso prévio, associado ou não à fotocoagulação a laser, para o EMD, mas não contempla a corticoterapia para o bloqueio da produção dos mediadores inflamatórios e barreira vascular endotelial. Por este motivo ainda existem necessidades não atendidas no cenário de tratamento das retinopatias diabéticas, especialmente relacionadas ao EMD. De acordo com a literatura, pacientes vitrectomizados, pacientes com eventos tromboembólicos recentes ou que não apresentaram resposta satisfatória ao tratamento com os antiangiogênicos, por exemplo, se encontram desassistidos pelo PCDT, além das dificuldades relacionadas ao regime de aplicações dos anti-VEGFs (injeções frequentes com deslocamentos aos serviços em saúde), complicando o atendimento no SUS. Ainda, relacionado às complicações da retinopatia diabética e qualidade de vida dos pacientes, a falta de tratamento ou tratamento subotimo pode levar à cegueira, além de outras complicações. BREVE HISTÓRICO: Em 2020 a tecnologia foi submetida e teve recomendação desfavorável devido as incertezas frente à ineficácia terapêutica, ausência de evidências robustas e falta de informação sobre delimitação e escopo para uso no SUS. PERGUNTA: O uso do implante intravítreo de dexametasona é seguro e efetivo no tratamento tratamento de adultos com edema macular diabético , como opção terapêutica no SUS? EVIDÊNCIAS CLÍNICAS: As evidências de eficácia e segurança do implante intravítreo de dexametasona são baseadas no estudo pivotal do implante intravítreo de dexametasona e em três estudos de comparação direta com os antiVEGFs, já incorporados ao SUS. O estudo pivotal que comparou o implante de dexametasona ao placebo, utilizando adicionalmente ou não a fotocoagulação a laser, demonstrou melhora da acuidade visual maior ou igual a 15 letras da linha de base do estudo, em ambos os braços de tratamento (DEXi 0,7 e 0,35 mg) em relação ao grupo placebo tratado apenas com fotocoagulação a laser. A melhora significativa no BCVA (do inglês, Best Corrected Visual Acuity) ocorreu independentemente do status do cristalino na linha de base do estudo. Os resultados do primeiro estudo de comparação direta são de não-inferioridade da dexametasona em relação ao ranibizumabe e redução do número de injeções realizadas, com perfil de segurança aceitável. O segundo estudo demonstrou equivalência da dexametasona ao tratamento com aflibercepte, uma vez que a diferença em BCVA não foi clinicamente significativa. O terceiro ECR de comparação direta incluído aponta para a segurança e eficácia em melhorar a BCVA e diminuir a espessura da mácula central, em pacientes com EMD, por ambos os implantes intravítreos (dexametasona vs ranibizumabe). A avaliação da qualidade metodológica dos ECRs foi realizada e os riscos de vieses foram descritos sendo de baixo risco, em sua maioria. AVALIAÇÃO ECONÔMICA: O presente dossiê demonstrou que Ozurdex se configura como uma tecnologia poupadora de recursos para o sistema de saúde, através de apresentação de uma análise de custo-minimização abrangente, que incluiu custos de medicação, custos de administração e custos relativos a potenciais eventos adversos. Através de uma análise de cenários que variou os principais parâmetros tais como horizonte temporal (1 ou 3 anos), e custo de aquisição dos comparadores (anti-VEGFs), valor de APAC (forma de financiamento dos antiangiogênicos) ou custo do frasco-ampola proposto pelos fabricantes em suas solicitações de incorporação, foi possível demonstrar que o tratamento com Ozurdex pode proporcionar economia de recursos que varia de R$ 1.533,21 até R$ 15.651,77 por paciente, em comparação aos anti-VEGFs. ANÁLISE DE IMPACTO ORÇAMENTÁRIO: Na análise de impacto orçamentário, foram avaliados sete cenários com combinações de diferentes valores para os comparadores (APAC e custo frasco-ampola), estimativas populacionais (epidemiológica ou demanda aferida) e dois possíveis comportamentos de market shares. A economia projetada foi de pelo menos R$ 8 milhões, avaliando o cenário mais conservador. Nos demais cenários as economias projetadas foram de R$ 16 e R$ 39 milhões, e entre R$ 148 e R$ 716 milhões em estimativa de usuários consideravelmente maior. Os montantes apresentados podem contribuir para a otimização dos recursos no manejo dos pacientes com RD. MONITORAMENTO DO HORIZONTE TECNOLÓGICO: Foram detectadas 3 tecnologias para compor o esquema terapêutico do edema macular diabético em adultos. São 3 anticorpos monoclonais inibidores do crescimento do endotélio vascular (VEGF): brolucizumabe, faricimabe e tarcocimabe tedromer, sendo que o segundo apresenta também ação anti-angiopoietina 2 (Ang-2). O brolucizumabe e faricimabe estão registrados na FDA e EMA desde 2022. O tarcocimabe está em fase 3 e pode apresentar resultados dos ensaios a partir de 2023. CONSIDERAÇÕES FINAIS: Adicionalmente às evidências clínicas de qualidade, a avaliação de custo-minimização possui e a análise de impacto orçamentário possuem incertezas em relação à definição de custos e cenários de comparação, mas que sugerem dominância do Implante biodegradável de dexametasona para tratamento do edema macular diabético sob a perspectiva do Sistema Único de Saúde. PERSPECTIVA DO PACIENTE: Foi aberta a Chamada Pública nº 09/2022 de 13 a 26 de fevereiro 2022 e duas pessoas se inscreveram, ambas representantes de associações de pacientes. A definição dos representantes titular e suplente foi determinada por decisão consensual entre o grupo de inscritos. A representante leu três relatos de pacientes que possuem edema macular diabético e recorrem ao DEXi. Os três pacientes iniciaram o tratamento com um antiangiogênico e, após o uso do DEXi, apresentaram melhora dos sintomas e o alcance de maior qualidade de vida. Nenhum deles manifestou eventos adversos após o uso do implante. RECOMENDAÇÃO PRELIMINAR: Os membros do plenário, presentes na 118ª Reunião ordinária da Conitec, no dia 03 de maio de 2023, deliberaram por unanimidade encaminhar para a consulta pública com recomendação favorável a incorporação do implante biodegradável de dexametasona para o tratamento do edema macular diabético (EMD) em maiores de 18 anos no SUS. CONSULTA PÚBLICA: Realizada no período de 03 de julho a 24 de julho do presente ano, teve 62 contribuições de caráter técnico-científico e 146 respostas tidas como de experiência ou opinião. As contribuições recebidas na consulta pública sobre o relatório que avalia a proposta de incorporação do Implante biodegradável de dexametasona para o tratamento do edema macular diabético (EMD) em maiores de 18 anos no SUS foram majoritariamente favoráveis a recomendação preliminar da Conitec, de incorporação. Não foram adicionadas na consulta pública, referências que alterassem a análise da evidência apresentada no relatório, apenas atualização pelo demandante. RECOMENDAÇÃO FINAL: Os membros do plenário, presentes na 121ª Reunião ordinária da Conitec, no dia 02 de agosto de 2023, deliberaram por unanimidade recomendar a incorporação do implante biodegradável de dexametasona para o tratamento do edema macular diabético (EMD) em maiores de 18 anos conforme Protocolo Clínico do Ministério da Saúde, sob registro de deliberação 840/2023. Para tal recomendação, levou-se em consideração, entre outros fatores, que há economia de recursos em todos os cenários analisados e que os estudos demostraram que o benefício clínico do implante de dexametasona é maximizado para algumas populações, que atualmente encontram-se desassistidas ou subtratadas devido à ausência de uma opção de corticoterapia no âmbito do SUS. DECISÃO: Incorporar, no âmbito do Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS, o implante biodegradável de dexametasona para o tratamento do edema macular diabético em maiores de 18 anos, conforme Protocolo Clínico do Ministério da Saúde, publicada no Diário Oficial da União nº 193, seção 1, página 143, em 9 de outubro de 2023.

Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: a contemporary registry-based analysis.

AIMS: We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES). METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 11 517 PCIs with second-generation DES performed in our institution between 2007 and 2019, we identified 8042 procedures performed using DP-DES and 3475 using BP-DES. The primary outcome was target lesion failure, the composite target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel myocardial infarction and death. Propensity score matching was used to create a well-balanced cohort. Mean follow-up was 4.8 years. Of the 3413 matched pairs, 21% were females, and the mean age was 66 years. At 1 year, the primary outcome occurred in 8.3% patients versus 7.1% (P = 0.07), and TLR rate was 3% versus 2% (P = 0.006) in patients with DP-DES and BP-DES respectively. Within 5 years, the primary outcome occurred in 23.1% versus 23.4% (P = 0.44), and the rate of TLR was 7.2% versus 6.5% (P = 0.07) in patients with DP-DES and BP-DES, respectively. CONCLUSION: Similar rates of the composite outcome were observed throughout the entire follow-up. Target lesion revascularization rates were lower in the BP-DES group at 1-year but equalized within 5 years.

Predictors and outcomes of acute recoil after ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents implantation: an intravascular ultrasound in native coronary arteries.

BACKGROUND: Ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SESs) may easily lead to acute recoil. This study investigated acute recoil after BP-SES implantation on the basis of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). METHODS: We enrolled 40 consecutive stents. Absolute acute recoil by quantitative coronary angiography was defined as the difference between the mean diameter of the last inflated balloon (X) and mean lumen diameter of the BP-SES immediately after balloon deflation (Y). Percent (%) acute recoil was defined as (X-Y)×100/X. IVUS was performed within the culprit lesion. Plaque eccentricity, % plaque burden and calcification grade score were assessed using IVUS. Calcification grade was scored on the basis of quadrants. On the basis of the median acute recoil value of 5.0%, the stents were divided into two groups: low (LAR, n = 20) and high % acute recoil (HAR, n = 20). RESULTS: Mean % acute recoil was 5.8 ± 5.3%. Plaque eccentricity, % plaque burden and stent/artery ratio were significantly higher in the HAR group than in the LAR group. Significant differences in % acute recoil were not observed regarding the types of stent diameter. In multivariate logistic regression and multiple linear regression analysis, plaque eccentricity and % plaque burden in the culprit plaque were significant positive predictors for the occurrence of % acute recoil. No significant differences, including clinical outcomes, were found between both groups at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Acute recoil of BP-SESs may be influenced by an eccentric plaque with a large burden, which did not affect long-term outcomes. However, the present study might suggest the proper strategy (e.g. a more exhaustive plaque preparation) before BP-SES implantation in a case with these IVUS characteristics.

Efficacy and Safety of Bioabsorbable Bone Hemostatic Agent in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Although a bioabsorbable bone hemostatic agent (BBHA) was developed approximately 20 years ago to overcome the shortcomings of conventional bone wax, its bleeding control capacity has not yet been studied. This study was aimed at investigating the efficacy and safety of BBHA in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Sixty-two patients who underwent unilateral primary TKA for knee osteoarthritis were included and randomized to the control or BBHA group. Before releasing the tourniquet, BBHA was applied on the bone-cut surface that was not covered by implants. The primary variable was the drainage volume during the postoperative period. The secondary outcomes were total estimated blood loss (EBL), hemoglobin level, hematocrit level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, range of motion (ROM), pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, and rate of complications. There were no significant differences in drainage volume or EBL between the 2 groups. Hemoglobin and hematocrit levels were higher in the BBHA group during the 4-week postoperative period; however, the intergroup differences were not significant. The ESR, CRP, ROM, and pain VAS scores in the BBHA group were not significantly different from the corresponding values in the control group. No specific complications were observed. Although BBHA was found to be safe without complications, it did not decrease bleeding after TKA in general cases. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of BBHA in patients with coagulation problems.

Durable Polymer Versus Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: The HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Large-scale randomized comparison of drug-eluting stents (DES) based on durable polymer versus biodegradable polymer technology is currently insufficient in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The present study aimed to prove the noninferiority of the durable polymer DES (DP-DES) compared with the biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES) in such patients. METHODS: The HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Diseases-Comparison of Reduction of Prasugrel Dose or Polymer Technology in ACS Patients) trial is an investigator-initiated, randomized, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial comparing the efficacy and safety of DP-DES and BP-DES in patients with ACS. The primary end point was a patient-oriented composite outcome (a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and any repeat revascularization) at 12 months. The key secondary end point was device-oriented composite outcome (a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 3413 patients were randomized to receive the DP-DES (1713 patients) and BP-DES (1700 patients). At 12 months, patient-oriented composite outcome occurred in 5.2% in the DP-DES group and 6.4% in the BP-DES group (absolute risk difference, -1.2%; Pnoninferiority<0.001). The key secondary end point, device-oriented composite outcome, occurred less frequently in the DP-DES group (DP-DES vs BP-DES, 2.6% vs 3.9%; hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.46-0.98]; P=0.038), mostly because of a reduction in target lesion revascularization. The rate of spontaneous nonfatal myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis were extremely low, with no significant difference between the 2 groups (0.6% versus 0.8%; P=0.513 and 0.1% versus 0.4%; P=0.174, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In ACS patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention, DP-DES was noninferior to BP-DES with regard to patient-oriented composite outcomes at 12 months after index percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://wwwclinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02193971.

Biodegradable materials for bone defect repair.

Compared with non-degradable materials, biodegradable biomaterials play an increasingly important role in the repairing of severe bone defects, and have attracted extensive attention from researchers. In the treatment of bone defects, scaffolds made of biodegradable materials can provide a crawling bridge for new bone tissue in the gap and a platform for cells and growth factors to play a physiological role, which will eventually be degraded and absorbed in the body and be replaced by the new bone tissue. Traditional biodegradable materials include polymers, ceramics and metals, which have been used in bone defect repairing for many years. Although these materials have more or fewer shortcomings, they are still the cornerstone of our development of a new generation of degradable materials. With the rapid development of modern science and technology, in the twenty-first century, more and more kinds of new biodegradable materials emerge in endlessly, such as new intelligent micro-nano materials and cell-based products. At the same time, there are many new fabrication technologies of improving biodegradable materials, such as modular fabrication, 3D and 4D printing, interface reinforcement and nanotechnology. This review will introduce various kinds of biodegradable materials commonly used in bone defect repairing, especially the newly emerging materials and their fabrication technology in recent years, and look forward to the future research direction, hoping to provide researchers in the field with some inspiration and reference.

Magnesium 2000 postmarket evaluation: Guideline adherence and intraprocedural performance of a sirolimus-eluting resorbable magnesium scaffold.

BACKGROUND: The Magmaris bioresorbable magnesium scaffold was successfully tested in in-vitro and in clinical premarket studies. Subsequently the Magmaris postmarket program aimed to review intraprocedural data of at least 2000 patients to assess user preferences, guideline adherence and intraprocedural performance in clinical routine. METHODS: This international multicentre survey encompasses data from 356 hospitals across 45 countries. As part of the certification for Magmaris implantation, each hospital had to complete consecutive post-market evaluation forms of their first 10 commercial Magmaris patients. RESULTS: From June 2016 to May 2018, data on 2018 implantations were collected. Main reasons for selecting Magmaris was patients' life expectancy (67%, n = 1359) and low or not calcified lesions, (67%, n = 1357). Magmaris was successfully deployed in 99% of cases (n = 1995), predilatation was performed in 95% (n = 1922) and post-dilatation in 87% (n = 1756). Physicians rated the overall performance and the pushability as good or very good in 96% of cases (n = 1799). Guide wire friction, trackability, and conformability were rated as good or very good in 94% of cases, and crossability in 93%. The majority of patients were scheduled to receive dual antiplatelet therapy for up to 12 months. CONCLUSION: Generally, implantation guidelines were adhered to and theoretical advantages of the metal scaffold observed in in-vitro tests have translated into practice with good intraprocedural performance outcomes, confirming the controlled roll-out of this novel technology into clinical practice. SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENT: The Magmaris 2000 program includes the first commercial cases at each hospital. Overall, data on 2018 implantations were collected. The high rate of pre- and post-dilatation as well as other parameters confirm that generally the implantation guidelines are adhered to and the good intraprocedural performance (rated as good or very good in 96%) confirm the theoretical advantages of a metallic scaffold in practice.

Testing bioresorbable stent feasibility in a rat aneurysm model.

BACKGROUND: Advances in stent-assisted coiling have incrementally expanded endovascular treatment options for complex cerebral aneurysms. After successful coil consolidation and aneurysm occlusion, endovascular scaffolds are no longer needed. Thus, bioresorbable stents that disappear after aneurysm healing could avoid future risks of in-stent thrombosis and the need for lifelong antiplatelet therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the applicability and compatibility of a bioresorbable magnesium- alloy stent (brMAS) for assisted coiling. METHODS: Saccular sidewall aneurysms were created in 84 male Wistar rats and treated with brMAS alone, brMAS + aspirin, or brMAS + coils + aspirin. Control groups included no treatment (natural course), solely aspirin treatment, or conventional cobalt-chromium stent + coils + aspirin treatment. After 1 and 4 weeks, aneurysm specimens were harvested and macroscopically, histologically, and molecularly examined for healing, parent artery perfusion status, and inflammatory reactions. Stent degradation was monitored for up to 6 months with micro-computed and optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: Aneurysms treated with brMAS showed advanced healing, neointima formation, and subsequent stent degradation. Additional administration of aspirin sustained aneurysm healing while reducing stent-induced intraluminal and periadventitial inflammatory responses. No negative interaction was detected between platinum coils and brMAS. Progressive brMAS degradation was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: brMAS induced appropriate healing in this sidewall aneurysm model. The concept of using bioresorbable materials to promote complete aneurysm healing and subsequent stent degradation seems promising. These results should encourage further device refinements and clinical evaluation of this treatment strategy for cerebrovascular aneurysms.

Serial Optical Coherence Tomography at Baseline, 7 Days, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 Months After Bioresorbable Scaffold Implantation in a Growing Porcine Model.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about serial changes in lumen and device dimensions after bioresorbable scaffold implantation in a growing animal model. Methods and Results: ABSORB (n=14) or bare metal stents (ICROS amg [Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA], Winsen-Luhe, Germany; n=15) were implanted in the coronary arteries of domestic swine (a hybrid of Finnish-Norwegian Landrace swine) weighing 30-35 kg. Angiography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed immediately after implantation and repeated at 7 days, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the index procedure. One month after implantation, mean lumen area decreased relative to baseline in both groups (relative area change from baseline, -41.4±15.6% for ABSORB vs. -20.9±18.6% for ICROS) while mean device area decreased only in the ABSORB group (relative area change: -11.1±9.4% vs. +0.14±7.95%, respectively). At 12 months, mean lumen area increased relative to baseline in both groups (relative area change from baseline, +55.6±22.4% vs. +32.3±83.6%, respectively) in accordance with the swine growth weighing up to 260-300 kg. Mean device area in the ICROS group remained stable whereas that in the ABSORB group began to increase between 3 and 6 months along with the vessel growth (relative area change: +107.8±25.7% vs. +0.14±7.95%). CONCLUSIONS: In the growing porcine model, ABSORB was associated with greater extent of recoil 1 month after implantation compared with ICROS but demonstrated substantial adaptability to vessel growth in late phase.

Pathology of Bioabsorbable Implants in Preclinical Studies.

Bioabsorbable implants can be advantageous for certain surgical tissue bioengineering applications and implant-assisted tissue repair. They offer the obvious benefits of nonpermanence and eventual restoration of the native tissue's biomechanical and immunological properties, while providing a structural scaffold for healing and a route for additional therapies (i.e., drug elution). They present unique developmental, imaging, and histopathological challenges in the conduct of preclinical animal studies and in interpretation of pathology data. The bioabsorption process is typically associated with a gradual decline (over months to years) in structural strength and integrity and may also be associated with cellular responses such as phagocytosis that may confound interpretation of efficacy and safety end points. Additionally, as these implants bioabsorb, they become increasingly difficult to isolate histologically and thus imaging modalities such as microCT become very valuable to determine the original location of the implants and to assess the remodeling response in tandem with histopathology. In this article, we will review different types of bioabsorbable implants and commonly used bioabsorbable materials; additionally, we will address some of the most common challenges and pitfalls confronting histologists and pathologists in collecting, handling, imaging, preparing tissues through histology, evaluating, and interpreting study data associated with bioabsorbable implants.

Histopathological Evaluation of Orthopedic Medical Devices: The State-of-the-art in Animal Models, Imaging, and Histomorphometry Techniques.

Orthopedic medical devices are continuously evolving for the latest clinical indications in craniomaxillofacial, spine, trauma, joint arthroplasty, sports medicine, and soft tissue regeneration fields, with a variety of materials from new metallic alloys and ceramics to composite polymers, bioresorbables, or surface-treated implants. There is great need for qualified medical device pathologists to evaluate these next generation biomaterials, with improved biocompatibility and bioactivity for orthopedic applications, and a broad range of knowledge is required to stay abreast of this ever-changing field. Orthopedic implants require specialized imaging and processing techniques to fully evaluate the bone-implant interface, and the pathologist plays an important role in determining the proper combination of histologic processing and staining for quality slide production based on research and development trials and validation. Additionally, histomorphometry is an essential part of the analysis to quantify tissue integration and residual biomaterials. In this article, an overview of orthopedic implants and animal models, as well as pertinent insights for tissue collection, imaging, processing, and slide generation will be provided with a special focus on histopathology and histomorphometry evaluation.

Comparison of the biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting stent with contemporary drug-eluting stents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Despite similar efficacy and safety profile in pilot studies, bioresorbable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) could have potential benefit over latest generation durable polymer (DP)-DES by facilitating vessel healing, therefore reducing inflammation and neoatherosclerosis leading to enhanced clinical safety. Therefore, we sought to perform a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting BP-DES (BP-EES) to second-generation DP-DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the safety and efficacy of BP-EES in patients treated for coronary artery disease. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library through February 2018 for RCTs that included outcome data on BP-EES. We identified four eligible studies, which included a total of 4631 patients. Three studies reported a follow-up of one year and one study of five years. The BP-EES group, included 2315 patients and the DP-DES group included 2316 patients (1143 treated with DP-EES and 1173 treated with zotarolimus eluting DP-DES). Patient's characteristics were comparable between the two groups except for higher prevalence of prior MI in the DP-DES group (25.7 vs 22.5%, respectively, p = 0.001). Procedural characteristics were comparable among groups except for slightly longer lesions in the BP-EES group compared to the DP-DES group (mean 15.1 vs 14.9 mm, p = 0.04). No significant differences were observed for cardiac mortality (p = 0.72), occurrence of MI (p = 0.64), any TLR (p = 0.93), ST (p = 0.85) or major adverse cardiac events (p = 0.43). CONCLUSION: Overall, based on the available data BP-EES had similar one-year outcomes to contemporary DP-DES. Whether these devices could enhance clinical safety remains to be evaluated at longer follow-up.

Balloons and Stents and Scaffolds: Preclinical Evaluation of Interventional Devices for Occlusive Arterial Disease.

Atherosclerosis places a significant burden on humankind; it is the leading cause of mortality globally, and for those living with atherosclerosis, it can significantly impact quality of life. Fortunately, treatment advances have effectively reduced the morbidity and mortality related to atherosclerosis, with one such modality being percutaneous intervention (PCI) to open occluded arteries. Over the 40-year history of PCI, preclinical models have played a critical role in demonstrating proof of concept, characterizing the in vivo behavior (pharmacokinetics, degradation) and providing a reasonable assurance of biologic safety of interventional devices before entering into clinical trials. Further, preclinical models may provide insight into the potential efficacy of these devices with the appropriate study design and end points. While several species have been used in the evaluation of interventional devices, the porcine model has been the principal model used in the evaluation of safety of devices for both coronary and endovascular treatments. This article reviews the fundamentals of permanent stents, transient scaffolds, and drug-coated balloons and the models, objectives, and methods used in their preclinical evaluation.

Wireless bioresorbable electronic system enables sustained nonpharmacological neuroregenerative therapy.

Peripheral nerve injuries represent a significant problem in public health, constituting 2-5% of all trauma cases1. For severe nerve injuries, even advanced forms of clinical intervention often lead to incomplete and unsatisfactory motor and/or sensory function2. Numerous studies report the potential of pharmacological approaches (for example, growth factors, immunosuppressants) to accelerate and enhance nerve regeneration in rodent models3-10. Unfortunately, few have had a positive impact in clinical practice. Direct intraoperative electrical stimulation of injured nerve tissue proximal to the site of repair has been demonstrated to enhance and accelerate functional recovery11,12, suggesting a novel nonpharmacological, bioelectric form of therapy that could complement existing surgical approaches. A significant limitation of this technique is that existing protocols are constrained to intraoperative use and limited therapeutic benefits13. Herein we introduce (i) a platform for wireless, programmable electrical peripheral nerve stimulation, built with a collection of circuit elements and substrates that are entirely bioresorbable and biocompatible, and (ii) the first reported demonstration of enhanced neuroregeneration and functional recovery in rodent models as a result of multiple episodes of electrical stimulation of injured nervous tissue.

Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention: executive summary.

A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device -the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold- has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE- mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of coronary artery stent implantation in patients with end-stage chronic kidney disease including hemodialysis for three everolimus eluting (EES) stent designs: Bioresorbable polymer-EES, platinum chromium-EES, and cobalt chrome-EES.

BACKGROUNDS: New-generation bioresorbable polymer-everolimus eluting stents (BP-EES) are available. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes for BP-EES compared to more established stent designs, namely the platinum chromium-EES (PtCr-EES) and cobalt chrome-EES(CoCr-EES) in patients with the end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) including hemodialysis (HD). METHODS: One-hundred-forty-one consecutive stents (BP-EES [n = 44], PtCr-EES [n = 45], and CoCr-EES [n = 52]) were implanted in 104 patients with CKD. All patients underwent a follow-up coronary angiography at 12 months after implantation. End-stage CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 , or the need for HD. The following outcome variables were compared among the three stent groups after implantation and the 12-month follow-up: target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis (ST), and major adverse cardiac event (MACE). Minimal stent diameter (MSD) and %diameter-stenosis (%DS) were measured using quantitative coronary angiography. RESULTS: The overall rate of TLR and MACE was 14.6% and 30.8%, respectively, with no incidence of ST. Immediately after implantation, the MSD (P = 0.22) and %DS (P = 0.42) were equivalent among the three groups. However, at the 12-month follow-up, a tendency towards higher TLR was observed for the BP-EES group (22.7%) compared with the PtCr-EES (8.8%) and CoCr-EES (9.6%) groups (P = 0.07). Late loss in lumen diameter was also significantly greater for the BP-EES (0.51 ± 0.64 mm) group than either the PtCr-EES (0.20 ± 0.61 mm) and CoCr-EES (0.25 ± 0.70 mm) groups (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: BP-EES might increase the risk of in-stent restenosis in patients with end-stage of CKD or the need for HD.

The effect of different thermal treatment on the physical properties of PGA/PCL copolymer suture material.

Samples of polyglycolic acid PGA/polycaprolactone PCL copolymer absorbable suture materials, which is called Poliglecaprone PGC copolymer suture, were thermally treated by two different processes. The first method is the direct heat exposure, from 20 to 38 °C, in the surrounding medium. Which is an environmental study. The other method is the annealing process at temperatures ranged from 65, 80, 100, 120, and 140 °C, for two different duration periods 60 and 120 min. This is an extensive technical study. The refractive indices of thermally treated PGA/PCL copolymer sutures were measured using multiple-beam Fizeau fringes. The birefringence profiles across the suture cross-sections were studied for different annealing conditions. The effect of heat on the polarizabilty per unit volume, dielectric properties, and suture diameter were investigated. The activation energy for the heating processes was calculated using Arrhenius equation. Microinterferograms are given for illustration.

Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention: executive summary.

A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device-the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold-has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE-mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.

Polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stent versus biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent in patients with and without diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare clinical outcome of polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stent (PF-AES) versus biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BD-BES) in "all-comer" diabetes mellitus (DM) and non-DM patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: The PF-AES has shown promising preliminary results in patients with DM. METHODS: Data from 2 multicentre-national registries (the ASTUTE and the INSPIRE-1) were used to analyse 1776 patients stratified in non-DM and DM. A double 1:1 propensity-score matched analysis (PF-AES vs. BD-BES) was performed in each group to adjust for clinical and procedural characteristics. Primary stent-efficacy and stent-safety endpoints were 1-year target-lesion revascularization (TLR) and target-lesion failure (TLF, composed of cardiac-death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and any TLR). RESULTS: After propensity-score matching, 850 patients were stratified as non-DM (425 PF-AES/425 BD-BES) and 480 as DM patients (240 PF-AES/240 BD-BES). Both TLF (20 of 425 [5%] vs. 24 of 425 [6%]; Plog-rank=0.527) and TLR (9 of 425 [2%] vs. 18 of 425 [4%]; Plog-rank=0.079) were similar between PF-AES and BD-BES in non-DM patients. In DM, TLF (12 of 240 [5%] vs. 31 of 240 [13%]; Plog-rank=0.002) and TLR (9 of 240 [4%] vs. 21 of 240 [9%]; Plog-rank=0.019) were significantly lower in PF-AES compared to BD-BES. Upon multivariate analysis, the most powerful predictors of TLF were chronic kidney disease in non-DM (OR 4.24, 95% CI: 2.07-8.70, p<0.001) and stent type in DM patients (OR 2.76, 1.36-5.56, p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: This matched-cohort study suggests that PF-AES has better safety and efficacy profile than BD-BES in patients with DM.