Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and performance of the BVS Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System (EECSS) in the treatment of patients with a maximum of two de novo native coronary artery lesions located in two different major epicardial vessels.
Currently in development at Abbott Vascular. Not available for sale in the United States.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Absorb stent | Experimental | Bioabsorbable Vascular Solutions Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System (BVS EECSS) |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent | Device | Bioabsorbable drug eluting stent implantation in the treatment of coronary artery disease |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 30 days |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 1 year |
| In-scaffold Late Loss: In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 180 Days | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | 180 days |
| In-scaffold Late Loss: In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 1 Year | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up | 1 year |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical Device Success (Per Lesion) | Successful delivery and deployment of the Clinical Investigation scaffold at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the scaffold delivery system with attainment of final residual stenosis of less than 50% of the target lesion by QCA (by visual estimation if QCA unavailable). Standard pre-dilation catheters and post-dilatation catheters (if applicable) may be used. Bailout patients will be included as device success only if the above criteria for clinical device are met. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Mean Reference Area | 1 year | |
| Mean Reference Area | 2 years | |
| Mean Reference Area |
General inclusion criteria
Angiographic Inclusion Criteria
General Exclusion Criteria
Angiographic Exclusion Criteria
Target lesion(s) meets any of the following criteria:
The target vessel contains visible thrombus
Another clinically significant lesion is located in the same major epicardial vessel as the target lesion(s) (including side branches)
Patient has a high probability that a procedure other than pre-dilatation and stenting and (if necessary) post-dilatation will be required at the time of index procedure for treatment of the target vessel (e.g. atherectomy, cutting balloon or brachytherapy)
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Patrick Serruys, MD | Erasmus Heart Center, Thorax Centrum | Principal Investigator |
| John Ormiston, MD | Auckland City Hospital | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St. Vincent's Hospital | Melbourne | Victoria | 3065 | Australia | ||
| Monash Heart |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 29247976 | Derived | Zeng Y, Cavalcante R, Collet C, Tenekecioglu E, Sotomi Y, Miyazaki Y, Katagiri Y, Asano T, Abdelghani M, Nie S, Bourantas CV, Bruining N, Onuma Y, Serruys PW. Coronary calcification as a mechanism of plaque/media shrinkage in vessels treated with bioresorbable vascular scaffold: A multimodality intracoronary imaging study. Atherosclerosis. 2018 Feb;269:6-13. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2017.11.002. Epub 2017 Dec 2. | |
| 28893770 |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Absorb, cohort A | View source |
Not provided
ITT population were assessed for all clinical endpoints. For imaging outcomes,Group 1 (n=45) patients were followed up at 180 days, 2 & 5 years; while Group 2 (n=56) patients at 1, 3 & 5 years. Therefore, data related to imaging outcomes are available only for Group 1 at 180 days, 2 & 5 years timeframe & only for Group 2 at 1, 3 & 5 years timeframe
Total of 101 patients (intent to treat patient population [ITT]) were enrolled in the ABSORB Cohort B study at 12 clinical sites in Europe/Australia/New Zealand between March 19, 2009 and November 6, 2009. Only for assessing imaging outcomes at different follow-up periods, subjects were divided into Group 1 (n = 45) & Group 2 (n = 56).
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Absorb BVS | Bioabsorbable Vascular Solutions Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System (BVS EECSS) Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent: Bioabsorbable drug eluting stent implantation in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Investigational devices available for the study were the Absorb BVS with a diameter of 3.0 mm and length of 18 mm. A total of 249 Absorb BVS were received at 12 investigational sites in the ABSORB Cohort B clinical study. Of the 249 devices received by the study sites, 102 were implanted in patients and 147 were returned to the sponsor. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline |
| |||||||||||||
| 30-day Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 180-day Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 270-day Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 1-year Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 2-year Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 3-year Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 4-year Clinical Follow-up |
| |||||||||||||
| 5-year Clinical Follow-up |
|
The patient demographics for the full Cohort B 101 patients (Group 1, 45 patients and Group 2, 56 patients) are described.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Absorb BVS | Bioabsorbable Vascular Solutions Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System (BVS EECSS) Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent: Bioabsorbable drug eluting stent implantation in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Investigational devices available for the study were the Absorb BVS with a diameter of 3.0 mm and length of 18 mm. A total of 249 Absorb BVS were received at twelve investigational sites in the ABSORB Cohort B clinical study. Of the 249 devices received by the study sites, 102 were implanted in patients and 147 were returned to the sponsor. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
5 years
The data for adverse event reporting & clinical outcomes was collected from the full Cohort B (101 patients) up to 5 years (i.e. At Discharge,30 days,270 days,12 months,18 months,2,3,4 & 5 years).The subjects were only divided to Group 1 (n = 45; followed for 6 months, 2 & 5 years) and Group 2 (n = 56; followed for 1, 2 & 5 years) for analyzing imaging outcomes (Angiography, IVUS, Intravascular Ultrasound-virtual histology (IVUS-VH) and OCT imaging procedures) at different follow-up periods.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | ABSORB Stent | Bioabsorbable Vascular Solutions Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System (BVS EECSS) Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent: Bioabsorbable drug eluting stent implantation in the treatment of coronary artery disease |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Angina pectoris | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Angina pectoris | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Susan Veldhof | Abbott Vascular International BVBA | 31653428610 | susan.veldhof@av.abbott.com |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003327 | Coronary Disease |
| D003324 | Coronary Artery Disease |
| D023903 | Coronary Restenosis |
| D014652 | Vascular Diseases |
| D017202 | Myocardial Ischemia |
| D023921 | Coronary Stenosis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D006331 | Heart Diseases |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
| D001161 | Arteriosclerosis |
| D001157 | Arterial Occlusive Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| On day 0 (the day of procedure) |
| Clinical Procedure Success (Per Patient) | Successful delivery and deployment of the Clinical Investigation scaffold at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the scaffold delivery system with attainment of final residual stenosis of less than 50% of the target lesion by QCA (by visual estimation if QCA unavailable) and/or using any adjunctive device without the occurrence of ischemia-driven major adverse cardiac event (MACE) during the hospital stay with a maximum of first seven days post index procedure. | On day 0 (the day of procedure) |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 180 days |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 270 days |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 2 years |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 3 years |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 4 years |
| Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | 5 years |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 30 days |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 180 days |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 270 days |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 1 year |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 2 years |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 3 years |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 4 years |
| Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | 5 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 30 days |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 180 days |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 270 days |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 1 year |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 2 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 3 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 4 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| 5 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 30 days |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 180 days |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 270 days |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 1 year |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 2 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 3 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 4 years |
| Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| 5 years |
| Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | 30 days |
| Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | 1 year |
| Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | 2 years |
| Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | 3 years |
| Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | 4 years |
| Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | 5 years |
| Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| 30 days |
| Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| 1 year |
| Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| 2 years |
| Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| 3 years |
| Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| 4 years |
| Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| 5 years |
| Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | 30 days |
| Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | 1 year |
| Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | 2 years |
| Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | 3 years |
| Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | 4 years |
| Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | 5 years |
| In-scaffold Late Loss (LL): In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 2 Years | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | 2 years |
| In-scaffold Late Loss (LL): In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 3 Years | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | 3 years |
| In-scaffold Late Loss (LL): In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 5 Years | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | 5 years |
| Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 180 Days | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | 180 days |
| Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 1 Year | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | 1 year |
| Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 2 Years | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | 2 years |
| Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 3 Years | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | 3 years |
| Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 5 Years | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | 5 years |
| Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 180 Days | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | 180 days |
| Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 1 Year | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | 1 year |
| Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 2 Years | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | 2 years |
| Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 3 Years | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | 3 years |
| Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 5 Years | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | 5 years |
| In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | 180 days |
| In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | 1 year |
| In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | 2 years |
| In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | 3 years |
| In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | 5 years |
| Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | 180 days |
| Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | 1 year |
| Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | 2 years |
| Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | 3 years |
| Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | 5 years |
| In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | 180 days |
| In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | 1 year |
| In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | 2 years |
| In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | 3 years |
| In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | 5 years |
| Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | 180 days |
| Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | 1 year |
| Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | 2 years |
| Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | 3 years |
| Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | 5 years |
| Thrombus | 180 days |
| Thrombus | 1 year |
| Thrombus | 2 years |
| Thrombus | 3 years |
| Thrombus | 5 years |
| Vasomotion Analysis: In-scaffold Mean Luminal Diameter | Vasomotion function was assessed in reaction to nitrate administration. | 5 years |
| Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | 180 days |
| Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | 1 year |
| Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | 2 year |
| Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | 3 year |
| Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 180 days |
| Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 1 year |
| Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 2 year |
| Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 3 year |
| Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 180 days |
| Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 1 year |
| Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 2 year |
| Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | 3 year |
| 3 years |
| Mean Reference Area | 5 years |
| Mean Luminal Area | 1 year |
| Mean Luminal Area | 2 years |
| Mean Luminal Area | 3 years |
| Mean Luminal Area | 5 years |
| Minimum Luminal Area | 1 year |
| Minimum Luminal Area | 2 years |
| Minimum Luminal Area | 3 years |
| Minimum Luminal Area | 5 years |
| Mean Stent Area | 1 year |
| Mean Scaffold Area | 2 years |
| Mean Scaffold Area | 3 years |
| Minimum Stent Area | 1 year |
| Minimum Scaffold Area | 2 year |
| Minimum Scaffold Area | 3 years |
| Luminal Volume | 1 year |
| Luminal Volume | 2 years |
| Luminal Volume | 3 years |
| Luminal Volume | 5 years |
| Stent Volume | 1 year |
| Scaffold Volume | 2 years |
| Scaffold Volume | 3 years |
| Mean Luminal Diameter | 1 year |
| Mean Luminal Diameter | 2 years |
| Mean Luminal Diameter | 3 years |
| Mean Luminal Diameter | It is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | 5 years |
| Minimum Luminal Diameter (MLD) | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | 1 year |
| Minimum Luminal Diameter | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | 2 years |
| Minimum Luminal Diameter | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | 3 years |
| Minimum Luminal Diameter | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | 5 years |
| Mean Stent Diameter | 1 year |
| Mean Scaffold Diameter | 2 years |
| Mean Scaffold Diameter | 3 years |
| Minimum Stent Diameter | 1 year |
| Minimum Scaffold Diameter | 2 years |
| Minimum Scaffold Diameter | 3 years |
| Strut Volume | 1 year |
| Strut Volume | 2 years |
| Strut Volume | 3 years |
| Number of Struts Per BVS | 1 year |
| Number of Struts Per BVS | 2 years |
| Number of Struts Per BVS | 3 years |
| Number of Struts Per BVS | 5 years |
| % of Covered Struts (150 µm) | 1 year |
| % of Acutely Covered Struts | 2 years |
| % of Acutely Covered Struts | 3 years |
| % of Uncovered Struts (150 µm) | 1 year |
| % of Uncovered Struts (150 µm) | 2 years |
| % of Uncovered Struts (150 µm) | 3 years |
| Number of Struts in Side Branch | 1 year |
| Number of Struts in Side Branch | 2 years |
| Number of Struts in Side Branch | 3 years |
| Number of Struts in Side Branch | 5 years |
| Tissue Coverage Area Classical | 1 year |
| Tissue Coverage Area BVS (Neointimal Area) | 1 year |
| Tissue Coverage Volume Classical | 1 year |
| Tissue Coverage Volume BVS | 1 year |
| Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume Classical | 1 year |
| Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume BVS | 1 year |
| Tissue Coverage Area Classical | 2 years |
| Tissue Coverage Area BVS (Neointimal Area) | 2 years |
| Tissue Coverage Volume Classical | 2 years |
| Tissue Coverage Volume BVS | 2 years |
| Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume Classical | 2 years |
| Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume BVS | 2 years |
| Tissue Coverage Area Classical | 3 years |
| Tissue Coverage Area BVS (Neointimal Area) | 3 years |
| Tissue Coverage Volume Classical | 3 years |
| Tissue Coverage Volume BVS | 3 years |
| Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume Classical | 3 years |
| Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume BVS | 3 years |
| Mean Flow Area | 1 year |
| Minimum Flow Area | 1 year |
| Mean Strut Core Area | 1 year |
| Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | 1 year |
| Mean Flow Area | 2 years |
| Minimum Flow Area | 2 years |
| Mean Strut Core Area | 2 years |
| Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | 2 years |
| Mean Flow Area | 3 years |
| Minimum Flow Area | 3 years |
| Mean Strut Core Area | 3 years |
| Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | 3 years |
| Mean Flow Area | 5 years |
| Minimum Flow Area | 5 years |
| Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | 5 years |
| Melbourne |
| Australia |
| Onze-Lieve VrouweZiekenhuis | Aalst | Belgium |
| Skejby Sygehus | Aarhus | Denmark |
| Institut Hospitalier Jacques Cartier | Massy | France |
| Catharina ZH Eindhoven | Eindhoven | Netherlands |
| Erasmus Medical Center | Rotterdam | Netherlands |
| Maasstad Ziekenhuis | Rotterdam | Netherlands |
| Auckland City Hospital | Auckland | New Zealand |
| Christchurch Hospital | Christchurch | New Zealand |
| Jagiellonian University | Krakow | Poland |
| Inselspital Bern, Kardiologie | Bern | 3010 | Switzerland |
| Derived |
| Onuma Y, Grundeken MJ, Nakatani S, Asano T, Sotomi Y, Foin N, Ng J, Okamura T, Wykrzykowska JJ, de Winter RJ, van Geuns RJ, Koolen J, Christiansen EH, Whitbourn R, McClean D, Smits P, Windecker S, Ormiston JA, Serruys PW. Serial 5-Year Evaluation of Side Branches Jailed by Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Using 3-Dimensional Optical Coherence Tomography: Insights From the ABSORB Cohort B Trial (A Clinical Evaluation of the Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Sep;10(9):e004393. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004393. |
| 28330651 | Derived | Zeng Y, Tateishi H, Cavalcante R, Tenekecioglu E, Suwannasom P, Sotomi Y, Collet C, Nie S, Jonker H, Dijkstra J, Radu MD, Raber L, McClean DR, van Geuns RJ, Christiansen EH, Fahrni T, Koolen J, Onuma Y, Bruining N, Serruys PW. Serial Assessment of Tissue Precursors and Progression of Coronary Calcification Analyzed by Fusion of IVUS and OCT: 5-Year Follow-Up of Scaffolded and Nonscaffolded Arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Oct;10(10 Pt A):1151-1161. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.11.016. Epub 2017 Mar 15. |
| 28329198 | Derived | Onuma Y, Collet C, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, Christiansen E, Koolen J, Smits P, Chevalier B, McClean D, Dudek D, Windecker S, Meredith I, Nieman K, Veldhof S, Ormiston J, Serruys PW; ABSORB Investigators. Long-term serial non-invasive multislice computed tomography angiography with functional evaluation after coronary implantation of a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold: the ABSORB cohort B MSCT substudy. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 May 1;18(8):870-879. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jex022. |
| 26892411 | Derived | Serruys PW, Ormiston J, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, Dudek D, Christiansen E, Chevalier B, Smits P, McClean D, Koolen J, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, Meredith I, Wasungu L, Ediebah D, Veldhof S, Onuma Y. A Polylactide Bioresorbable Scaffold Eluting Everolimus for Treatment of Coronary Stenosis: 5-Year Follow-Up. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Feb 23;67(7):766-76. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.11.060. |
| 26585622 | Derived | Ishibashi Y, Nakatani S, Sotomi Y, Suwannasom P, Grundeken MJ, Garcia-Garcia HM, Bartorelli AL, Whitbourn R, Chevalier B, Abizaid A, Ormiston JA, Rapoza RJ, Veldhof S, Onuma Y, Serruys PW. Relation Between Bioresorbable Scaffold Sizing Using QCA-Dmax and Clinical Outcomes at 1 Year in 1,232 Patients From 3 Study Cohorts (ABSORB Cohort B, ABSORB EXTEND, and ABSORB II). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Nov;8(13):1715-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.07.026. |
| 25790767 | Derived | Karanasos A, Garcia-Garcia HM, van Geuns RJ, Regar E. Fate of side-branch jailing and a malapposed platinum marker after resorption of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: serial optical coherence tomography observations. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Mar;8(3):e53-e54. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.10.020. No abstract available. |
| 25523532 | Derived | Onuma Y, Serruys PW, Muramatsu T, Nakatani S, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, Dudek D, Christiansen E, Smits PC, Chevalier B, McClean D, Koolen J, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, Meredith I, Garcia-Garcia HM, Veldhof S, Rapoza R, Ormiston JA. Incidence and imaging outcomes of acute scaffold disruption and late structural discontinuity after implantation of the absorb Everolimus-Eluting fully bioresorbable vascular scaffold: optical coherence tomography assessment in the ABSORB cohort B Trial (A Clinical Evaluation of the Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Dec;7(12):1400-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.06.016. |
| 25457053 | Derived | Zhang YJ, Iqbal J, Nakatani S, Bourantas CV, Campos CM, Ishibashi Y, Cho YK, Veldhof S, Wang J, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia HM, Dudek D, van Geuns RJ, Serruys PW; ABSORB Cohort B Study Investigators. Scaffold and edge vascular response following implantation of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a 3-year serial optical coherence tomography study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Dec;7(12):1361-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.06.025. Epub 2014 Nov 12. |
| 24746650 | Derived | Muramatsu T, Onuma Y, van Geuns RJ, Chevalier B, Patel TM, Seth A, Diletti R, Garcia-Garcia HM, Dorange CC, Veldhof S, Cheong WF, Ozaki Y, Whitbourn R, Bartorelli A, Stone GW, Abizaid A, Serruys PW; ABSORB Cohort B Investigators; ABSORB EXTEND Investigators; SPIRIT FIRST Investigators; SPIRIT II Investigators; SPIRIT III Investigators; SPIRIT IV Investigators. 1-year clinical outcomes of diabetic patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: a pooled analysis of the ABSORB and the SPIRIT trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 May;7(5):482-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.155. Epub 2014 Apr 16. |
| 24291783 | Derived | Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia HM, Muramatsu T, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, Dudek D, Thuesen L, Smits PC, Chevalier B, McClean D, Koolen J, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, Meredith I, Dorange C, Veldhof S, Hebert KM, Rapoza R, Ormiston JA. Dynamics of vessel wall changes following the implantation of the absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. EuroIntervention. 2014 Mar 20;9(11):1271-84. doi: 10.4244/EIJV9I11A217. |
| 23048057 | Derived | Ormiston JA, Serruys PW, Onuma Y, van Geuns RJ, de Bruyne B, Dudek D, Thuesen L, Smits PC, Chevalier B, McClean D, Koolen J, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, Meredith I, Dorange C, Veldhof S, Hebert KM, Rapoza R, Garcia-Garcia HM. First serial assessment at 6 months and 2 years of the second generation of absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Oct;5(5):620-32. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.971549. Epub 2012 Oct 9. |
| 22516401 | Derived | Gutierrez-Chico JL, Gijsen F, Regar E, Wentzel J, de Bruyne B, Thuesen L, Ormiston J, McClean DR, Windecker S, Chevalier B, Dudek D, Whitbourn R, Brugaletta S, Onuma Y, Serruys PW. Differences in neointimal thickness between the adluminal and the abluminal sides of malapposed and side-branch struts in a polylactide bioresorbable scaffold: evidence in vivo about the abluminal healing process. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Apr;5(4):428-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2011.12.015. |
| 22209268 | Derived | Brugaletta S, Radu MD, Garcia-Garcia HM, Heo JH, Farooq V, Girasis C, van Geuns RJ, Thuesen L, McClean D, Chevalier B, Windecker S, Koolen J, Rapoza R, Miquel-Hebert K, Ormiston J, Serruys PW. Circumferential evaluation of the neointima by optical coherence tomography after ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: can the scaffold cap the plaque? Atherosclerosis. 2012 Mar;221(1):106-12. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2011.12.008. Epub 2011 Dec 13. |
| 22104034 | Derived | Gutierrez-Chico JL, Radu MD, Diletti R, Sheehy A, Kossuth MB, Oberhauser JP, Glauser T, Harrington J, Rapoza RJ, Onuma Y, Serruys PW. Spatial distribution and temporal evolution of scattering centers by optical coherence tomography in the poly(L-lactide) backbone of a bioresorbable vascular scaffold. Circ J. 2012;76(2):342-50. doi: 10.1253/circj.cj-11-0726. Epub 2011 Nov 19. |
| 21958884 | Derived | Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Dudek D, Smits PC, Koolen J, Chevalier B, de Bruyne B, Thuesen L, McClean D, van Geuns RJ, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, Meredith I, Dorange C, Veldhof S, Hebert KM, Sudhir K, Garcia-Garcia HM, Ormiston JA. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting vascular scaffold for the treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: 12-month clinical and imaging outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Oct 4;58(15):1578-88. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.05.050. |
| 21939939 | Derived | Gomez-Lara J, Radu M, Brugaletta S, Farooq V, Diletti R, Onuma Y, Windecker S, Thuesen L, McClean D, Koolen J, Whitbourn R, Dudek D, Smits PC, Regar E, Veldhof S, Rapoza R, Ormiston JA, Garcia-Garcia HM, Serruys PW. Serial analysis of the malapposed and uncovered struts of the new generation of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with optical coherence tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Sep;4(9):992-1001. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2011.03.020. |
| 21777888 | Derived | Gomez-Lara J, Brugaletta S, Farooq V, van Geuns RJ, De Bruyne B, Windecker S, McClean D, Thuesen L, Dudek D, Koolen J, Whitbourn R, Smits PC, Chevalier B, Morel MA, Dorange C, Veldhof S, Rapoza R, Garcia-Garcia HM, Ormiston JA, Serruys PW. Angiographic geometric changes of the lumen arterial wall after bioresorbable vascular scaffolds and metallic platform stents at 1-year follow-up. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Jul;4(7):789-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2011.04.009. |
| 21359517 | Derived | Gutierrez-Chico JL, Serruys PW, Girasis C, Garg S, Onuma Y, Brugaletta S, Garcia-Garcia H, van Es GA, Regar E. Quantitative multi-modality imaging analysis of a fully bioresorbable stent: a head-to-head comparison between QCA, IVUS and OCT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Mar;28(3):467-78. doi: 10.1007/s10554-011-9829-y. Epub 2011 Feb 26. |
| 21098436 | Derived | Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Ormiston JA, de Bruyne B, Regar E, Dudek D, Thuesen L, Smits PC, Chevalier B, McClean D, Koolen J, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, Meredith I, Dorange C, Veldhof S, Miquel-Hebert K, Rapoza R, Garcia-Garcia HM. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold for treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: six-month clinical and imaging outcomes. Circulation. 2010 Nov 30;122(22):2301-12. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.970772. Epub 2010 Nov 15. |
| 21087756 | Derived | Gomez-Lara J, Garcia-Garcia HM, Onuma Y, Garg S, Regar E, De Bruyne B, Windecker S, McClean D, Thuesen L, Dudek D, Koolen J, Whitbourn R, Smits PC, Chevalier B, Dorange C, Veldhof S, Morel MA, de Vries T, Ormiston JA, Serruys PW. A comparison of the conformability of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds to metal platform coronary stents. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010 Nov;3(11):1190-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.07.016. |
| 20723856 | Derived | Okamura T, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia HM, Regar E, Wykrzykowska JJ, Koolen J, Thuesen L, Windecker S, Whitbourn R, McClean DR, Ormiston JA, Serruys PW; ABSORB Cohort B Investigators. 3-Dimensional optical coherence tomography assessment of jailed side branches by bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: a proposal for classification. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010 Aug;3(8):836-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.05.011. |
|
|
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
|
|
| Primary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Primary | In-scaffold Late Loss: In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 180 Days | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | In Cohort B, Group 1. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who had available follow up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Primary | In-scaffold Late Loss: In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 1 Year | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up | In Cohort B, Group 2. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who had available follow up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Clinical Device Success (Per Lesion) | Successful delivery and deployment of the Clinical Investigation scaffold at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the scaffold delivery system with attainment of final residual stenosis of less than 50% of the target lesion by QCA (by visual estimation if QCA unavailable). Standard pre-dilation catheters and post-dilatation catheters (if applicable) may be used. Bailout patients will be included as device success only if the above criteria for clinical device are met. | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of lesions | On day 0 (the day of procedure) | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Clinical Procedure Success (Per Patient) | Successful delivery and deployment of the Clinical Investigation scaffold at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the scaffold delivery system with attainment of final residual stenosis of less than 50% of the target lesion by QCA (by visual estimation if QCA unavailable) and/or using any adjunctive device without the occurrence of ischemia-driven major adverse cardiac event (MACE) during the hospital stay with a maximum of first seven days post index procedure. | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | On day 0 (the day of procedure) |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 180 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 270 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patients (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) | Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction,and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). | Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 270 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patients (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hierarchical Target Vessel Failure (TVF) | Target Vessel Failure (TVF) is the composite of Cardiac Death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or Ischemic-Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 270 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patients (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) | ID-TLR is defined as the revascularization at the target lesion associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 270 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Ischemia Driven Target Vessel Revascularization (ID-TVR) | ID-TVR is the revascularization in the target vessel associated with any of the following:
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patients (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Cardiac Death | Cardiac death is defined as any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. (This includes but is not limited to acute myocardial infarction, cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia or conduction abnormality, cerebrovascular accident within 30 days of the procedure or cerebrovascular accident suspected of being related to the procedure, death due to complication of the procedure, including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery.) | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patients (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Myocardial Infarction | Myocardial Infarction (MI):
| Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 30 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=45) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 2-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 3-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. Two patients (Group 1) lost to follow-up at 4-year follow-up period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 4 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scaffold Thrombosis | Scaffold thrombosis will be categorized as acute (≤ 1day), subacute (>1day ≤ 30 days) and late (>30 days) and will be defined as any of the following:
Any thromboses that occur less than 30 days after the index procedure will not be counted as restenosis. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analysis population includes both Group 1 (n=44) and Group 2 (n=56) patients. One patient from Group 1 population had lost-to-follow-up. Where as,1 patient (Group 1) missed the 4-year follow up but returned for the 5-year follow up. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Late Loss (LL): In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 2 Years | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | ITT population. In Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Late Loss (LL): In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 3 Years | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Late Loss (LL): In-scaffold MLD Post-procedure - In-scaffold MLD at 5 Years | In-scaffold Late Loss: in-scaffold MLD post-procedure - in-scaffold MLD at follow-up. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 180 Days | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 1 Year | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 2 Years | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 3 Years | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Proximal Late Loss: Proximal MLD Post-procedure - Proximal MLD at 5 Years | Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure - proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 180 Days | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 1 Year | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 2 Years | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 3 Years | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Distal Late Loss: Distal MLD Post-procedure - Distal MLD at 5 Years | Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure - distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to scaffold placement). | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR) | Percent of patients with a followup percent diameter stenosis of >=50% per QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | ITT population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | ITT population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | ITT population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | ITT population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Dissection | Dissection at follow-up that was present post-procedure. | ITT population. Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percentage of diameter stenosis | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percentage of diameter stenosis | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percentage of diameter stenosis | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percentage of diameter stenosis | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | In-scaffold Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS) | Percent Diameter Stenosis is defined as the value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1 and Group2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percentage of diameter stenosis | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Aneurysm | An abnormal expansion or protrusion of a coronary blood vessel resulting from a disease or weakening of the vessel's wall (all three layers) that exceeds the RVD of the vessel by 1.5 times. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population.Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Thrombus | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Thrombus | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Thrombus | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population.Cohort B, Group 1. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Thrombus | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Thrombus | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Cohort B, Group 1 and Group 2. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vasomotion Analysis: In-scaffold Mean Luminal Diameter | Vasomotion function was assessed in reaction to nitrate administration. | Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who had available follow up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Millimeter | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | Cohort B, Group 1. ITT population; Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percent of scaffold volume | 180 days | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | Cohort B, Group 2. ITT population; IVUS analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percent of scaffold volume | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | Cohort B, Group 1. ITT population; IVUS analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percent of scaffold volume | 2 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Volume Obstruction (VO) | Defined as scaffold intimal hyperplasia and calculated as 100*(Scaffold Volume - Lumen Volume)/Scaffold Volume by IVUS. | Cohort B, Group 2. ITT population; IVUS analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percent of scaffold volume | 3 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 1. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 2. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 1. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Persisting Incomplete Apposition | Persisting incomplete apposition is defined as incomplete apposition at follow-up that was present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 2. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 1. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 180 days |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 2. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 1. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 2 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Late Incomplete Apposition | Late-Acquired Incomplete Apposition is defined as incomplete apposition of the scaffold at follow-up, which was not present post-procedure. Incomplete Apposition: Failure of the scaffold to completely appose to the vessel wall after placement is defined as one or more scaffold strut separated from the vessel wall with evidence of blood speckles behind the strut in the ultrasound image. | Cohort B, Group 2. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Number | Percentage of participants | 3 year |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Reference Area | Optical coherence tomography (OCT) analysis,Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Reference Area | OCT analysis,Cohort B Group1 , Intent-to-Treat Population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Reference Area | OCT analysis,Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Reference Area | OCT analysis,Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Area | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population.OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Area | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Stent Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Scaffold Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Scaffold Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Stent Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Scaffold Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Scaffold Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Luminal Volume | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Luminal Volume | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Luminal Volume | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Luminal Volume | Cohort B Group 1 and Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Stent Volume | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Scaffold Volume | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Scaffold Volume | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Diameter | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Diameter | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Diameter | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Luminal Diameter | It is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Diameter (MLD) | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Diameter | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | Cohort B Group 1 , Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Diameter | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Luminal Diameter | The average of two orthogonal views (when possible) of the narrowest point within the area of assessment - in lesion, in scaffold or in segment. MLD is visually estimated during angiography by the Investigator; it is measured during QCA by the Angiographic Core Lab. | Cohort B (Group1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Stent Diameter | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Scaffold Diameter | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Scaffold Diameter | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Stent Diameter | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Scaffold Diameter | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Scaffold Diameter | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Strut Volume | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Strut Volume | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Strut Volume | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts Per BVS | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of Struts | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts Per BVS | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of Struts | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts Per BVS | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of Struts | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts Per BVS | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of Struts | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | % of Covered Struts (150 µm) | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Covered Struts | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | % of Acutely Covered Struts | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Covered Struts | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | % of Acutely Covered Struts | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Covered Struts | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | % of Uncovered Struts (150 µm) | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Uncovered Struts | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | % of Uncovered Struts (150 µm) | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Uncovered Struts | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | % of Uncovered Struts (150 µm) | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Uncovered Struts | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts in Side Branch | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of struts | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts in Side Branch | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of struts | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts in Side Branch | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of struts | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Struts in Side Branch | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Number of struts | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Area Classical | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Area BVS (Neointimal Area) | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Volume Classical | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Volume BVS | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume Classical | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Tissue Coverage Obstruction | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume BVS | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Tissue Coverage Obstruction | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Area Classical | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Area BVS (Neointimal Area) | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Volume Classical | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Volume BVS | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume Classical | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Tissue Coverage Obstruction | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume BVS | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Tissue Coverage Obstruction | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Area Classical | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Area BVS (Neointimal Area) | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Volume Classical | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Volume BVS | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^3 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume Classical | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Tissue Coverage Obstruction | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Tissue Coverage Obstruction Volume BVS | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent of Tissue Coverage Obstruction | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Flow Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Flow Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Strut Core Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percentage of Lumen Area Stenosis | 1 year | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Flow Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Flow Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Strut Core Area | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | Cohort B Group 1, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percentage of Lumen Area Stenosis | 2 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Flow Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Flow Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Strut Core Area | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | Cohort B Group 2, Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percentage of Lumen Area Stenosis | 3 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Mean Flow Area | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Minimum Flow Area | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | mm^2 | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Percent (%) Lumen Area Stenosis | Cohort B (Group 1 and Group 2), Intent-to-Treat Population. OCT analysis. The number of participants analyzed include subjects who had available follow-up data at that time frame. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percentage of Lumen Area Stenosis | 5 years | Target lesions | Target lesions |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 101 |
| 56 |
| 101 |
| 58 |
| 101 |
| Atrial fibrillation | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Atrial flutter | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Bradycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Cardiac failure congestive | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Coronary artery stenosis | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Coronary artery thrombosis | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Myocardial infarction | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Myocardial ischaemia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Palpitations | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Tachycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Cataract | Eye disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Abdominal pain upper | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Crohn's disease | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Gastric ulcer | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Gastrointestinal haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Tooth disorder | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Adverse drug reaction | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Chest discomfort | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Chest pain | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Influenza like illness | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Malaise | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Non-cardiac chest pain | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Thrombosis in device | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Cholecystitis acute | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Bronchopneumonia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Gangrene | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Infective exacerbation of chronic obstructive airways disease | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Lower respiratory tract infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Pneumonia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Postoperative wound infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Forearm fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| In-stent coronary artery restenosis | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Meniscus lesion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Cardiac stress test abnormal | Investigations | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Dehydration | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Diabetes mellitus inadequate control | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Arthritis reactive | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Musculoskeletal discomfort | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Osteoarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Osteoporosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Pain in extremity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Bladder neoplasm | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Lung neoplasm malignant | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Malignant pleural effusion | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Mantle cell lymphoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Metastatic neoplasm | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Pancreatic carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Squamous cell carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Carotid artery disease | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Haemorrhagic stroke | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Ischaemic stroke | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Presyncope | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Syncope | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Nephrolithiasis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Renal failure | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Urinary incontinence | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Dyspnoea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Respiratory failure | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Diabetic foot | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Skin ulcer | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Haematoma | Vascular disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Intermittent claudication | Vascular disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Varicose vein | Vascular disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Atrial fibrillation | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Coronary artery dissection | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Myocardial ischaemia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Non-cardiac chest pain | General disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Pain in extremity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Dyspnoea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Haematoma | Vascular disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA (10.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided