Procedural Results and One-Year Clinical Outcomes of Treatment of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Restenosis (from the RIBS VII Prospective Study).

Currently, both drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-eluting balloons are recommended in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) of metallic stents. However, the clinical results of repeated interventions in patients with restenosis of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) remain unsettled. We sought to assess the results of interventions in patients with BVS-ISR as compared with those obtained in patients with ISR of DES and bare-metal stents (BMS). Restenosis Intrastent: Treatment of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Restenosis (RIBS VII) is a prospective multicenter study (23 Spanish sites) that included 117 consecutive patients treated for BVS-ISR. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were similar to those of previous RIBS studies. Patients in the RIBS IV (DES-ISR, n = 309) and RIBS V (BMS - ISR, n = 189) randomized trials, were used as controls. Most patients with BVS-ISR were treated with DES (76%). Patients with BVS-ISR were younger, had larger vessels, and after interventions had higher in-segment residual diameter stenosis (19 ± 13%, 15 ± 11%, 15 ± 12%, p <0.001) than those treated for DES-ISR and BMS-ISR, respectively. At 1-year clinical follow-up (obtained in 100% of patients) target lesion revascularization (6%) was similar to that seen in patients with DES-ISR and BMS-ISR (8.7% and 3.7%, p = 0.32). Freedom from death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (primary clinical end point) was 8.5%, also similar to that found in patients with DES-ISR and BMS-ISR (14.2% and 7.4%, p = 0.09). Results were also similar when only patients treated with DES in each group were compared and remained unchanged after adjusting for potential confounders in baseline characteristics. Time to BVS-ISR did not influence angiographic or clinical results. This study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of coronary interventions for patients presenting with BVS-ISR. One-year clinical results in these patients are comparable to those seen in patients with ISR of metallic stents (ClinicalTrials.gov ID:NCT03167424).

To Take One's Breath Away: Echocardiography-Guided Aspiration of an Air Embolism During a MitraClip Procedure.

An air embolism (AE) is a rare but dreaded complication during endovascular procedures. Current guidance recommends hyperbaric oxygen therapy and aspiration for the management of a venous AE. However, the management of an arterial AE is much less described. We report a case of a 79-year-old man with symptomatic mitral regurgitation who underwent a MitraClip procedure. During the intervention, a massive AE was detected in the ascending aorta on transesophageal echocardiography. The AE was successfully aspirated while the patient remained hemodynamically stable. This report demonstrates the efficacy of an arterial AE's aspiration with a real-time echocardiography recording of the technique.

Une embolie gazeuse (EG) est une complication rare mais redoutée lors des interventions endovasculaires. Les directives actuelles recommandent l'oxygénothérapie hyperbare et l'aspiration pour la prise en charge d'une EG veineuse. Cependant, la prise en charge d'une EG artérielle est beaucoup moins bien décrite. Nous rapportons le cas d'un homme de 79 ans présentant une insuffisance mitrale symptomatique et ayant subi une procédure MitraClip. Au cours de l'intervention, une EG massive a été détectée dans l'aorte ascendante à l'échocardiographie transoesophagienne. L'EG a été aspirée avec succès alors que le patient est resté stable sur le plan hémodynamique. Ce rapport démontre l'efficacité de l'aspiration d'une EG artérielle avec un enregistrement en temps réel de la technique par échocardiographie.