How are you taking part in this consultation?

You will not be able to change how you comment later.

You must be signed in to answer questions

    The content on this page is not current guidance and is only for the purposes of the consultation process.

    Interventional procedure overview of bioresorbable stent implantation to treat coronary artery disease

    Closed for comments This consultation ended on at   Request commenting lead permission

    Validity and generalisability of the studies

    • The design, composition and features of different types of BVS vary significantly and may have an impact on clinical outcomes. They vary in the degradable material used [polymer such as poly-l-lactic acid-PLLA or magnesium alloy], thickness, eluting drugs used [everolimus, sirolimus, novolimus], and reabsorption time [within 1-4 years after implantation].

    • Most of the studies included in systematic reviews were assessing the first-generation Absorb BVS. There is very little evidence on second generation absorb BVS or new generation scaffolds.

    • Most of the RCTs included in the systematic reviews and HTA compared Absorb BVS with DES (CoCr-EES). Only 1 RCT compared MgBRS with DES-SES (Sabate 2019).

    • The RCTs included in the systematic reviews had a variety of patient characteristics, medication and follow-up.

    • Techniques of implantation are not standardised and evolved over time.