In-stent Flow Hemodynamics and the Risk of STent Failure Following Bioresorbable Vascular ScAFFolds Implantation – the STAFF Study

Open access


Background: Myocardial revascularization procedures have undergone important developments over the last decades, which led to a major shift in current clinical practice and therapeutic guidelines across the world. Bare metal and drug-eluting stents present several limitations, all centered on the concept of disturbed coronary hemodynamics after implantation, which can be surpassed by bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS). BVSs are fourth-generation stents used in coronary revascularization procedures, but despite all the promising initial results published on their efficiency, several clinical trials have reported unsatisfactory results, and the main explanation was accredited to improper implantation method. Shear stress is a central element of intravascular homeostasis; it controls vascular remodeling, as well as the development, progression, and destabilization of atheromatous plaques. This study aims to assess the role of in-stent flow hemodynamics (evaluated by computational determination of shear stress via coronary CT imaging) in predicting the clinical evolution following BVS implantation.

Material and methods: This case-control observational study will include patients with BVSs implanted at least 12 months prior to randomization. Each patient will undergo a complete evaluation of the demographic and clinical characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, and imaging acquisitions via coronary CT angiography, based on which the endothelial shear stress will be calculated before and after BVS implantation. Post-processing of CT imaging data will evaluate the shear stress and the composition of the coronary plaques along the entire coronary tree. The primary endpoint will be the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with altered vs. non-altered BVS-related shear stress, and the secondary endpoints will comprise evaluating the rate of progression of stent resorption and progression of shear stress alteration.

Conclusions: The findings of the STAFF study can be extremely useful in clinical practice for providing an answer to a key question that is still under debate: why do BVSs fail and how can we prevent this?.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Cardiovascular diseases. Available at:

  • 2. Windecker S Kolh P Alfonso F et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2541-2619.

  • 3. Montone RA Niccoli G De Marco F et al. Temporal Trends in Adverse Events After Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent Implantation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Circulation. 2017;135:2145-2154.

  • 4. Felix CM Vlachojannis GJ IJsselmuiden AJJ et al. Potentially increased incidence of scaffold thrombosis in patients treated with Absorb BVS who terminated DAPT before 18 months. EuroIntervention. 2017;13:e177-e184.

  • 5. Pernigotti A Moscarella E Spitaleri G Scardino C Ishida K Brugaletta S. Methods to assess bioresorbable vascular scaffold devices behaviour after implantation. J Thorac Dis. 2017;9:S959-S968.

  • 6. Sato T Tölg R El-Mawardy M Sulimov DS Richardt G Abdel-Wahab M. The fate of incomplete scaffold apposition of everolimus-eluting bioresorble scaffolds: A serial optical coherence tomography analysis. J Cardiol. 2017;pii:S0914-5087(17)30094-1.

  • 7. Duraiswamy N Jayachandran B Byrne J Moore JE Jr Schoephoerster RT. Spatial distribution of platelet deposition in stented arterial models under physiologic flow. Ann Biomed Eng. 2005;33:1767-1777.

  • 8. DePaola N Gimbrone MA Jr Davies PF Dewey CF Jr. Vascular endothelium responds to fluid shear stress gradients. Arterioscler Thromb. 1992;12:1254-1257.

  • 9. Nagel T Resnick N Dewey CF Gimbrone MA Jr. Vascular endothelial cells respond to spatial gradients in fluid shear stress by enhanced activation of transcription factors. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 1999;19:1825-1834.

  • 10. Davies PF Polacek DC Handen JS Helmke BP DePaola N. A spatial approach to transcriptional profiling: mechanotransduction and the focal origin of atherosclerosis. Trends Biotechnol. 1999;17:347-351.

  • 11. García-Cardeña G Comander JI Blackman BR Anderson KR Gimbrone MA. Mechanosensitive endothelial gene expression profiles: scripts for the role of hemodynamics in atherogenesis? Ann NY Acad Sci. 2001;947:1-6.

  • 12. Libby P. Coronary artery injury and the biology of atherosclerosis: inflammation thrombosis and stabilization. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:3J-8J.

  • 13. Folie BJ McIntire LV. Mathematical analysis of mural thrombogenesis. Concentration profiles of platelet-activating agents and effects of viscous shear flow. Biophys J. 1989;56:1121-1141.

  • 14. Onuma Y Dudek D Thuesen L et al. Five-year clinical and functional multislice computed tomography angiographic results after coronary implantation of the fully resorbable polymeric everolimus-eluting scaffold in patients with de novo coronary artery disease: the ABSORB cohort A trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:999-1009.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 200 69 1
PDF Downloads 95 27 0