A Randomized Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Everolimus-eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Everolimus-eluting Metallic Stent in Long Coronary Lesions

PCI of diffuse long coronary lesions still remains challenging because of relatively high risk of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis compared to short coronary lesions. The purpose of the study is to compare an incidence of composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at 1 year between Absorb everolimus-eluting BVS and Xience EES after coronary intervention in long lesions.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Age 19-85 years
• Patients with ischemic heart disease requiring PCI
• Significant coronary de novo lesion (stenosis >50% by quantitative angiographic analysis) requiring stent ≥28 mm in length based on angiographic estimation
• Reference vessel diameter of 2.5 to 3.75 mm by operator assessment

Exclusion Criteria:

• Acute myocardial infarction within 48 hours with unstable hemodynamics requiring pharmacologic or mechanical support
• Complex coronary morphology including left main disease and bifurcation lesion requiring two-stent technique
• Contraindication or hypersensitivity to anti-platelet agents or contrast media
• Treated with any metallic stent or BVS within 3 months at other vessel
• Cardiogenic shock
• Left ventricular ejection fraction <40%
• Pregnant women or women with potential childbearing
• Inability to follow the patient over the period of 1 year after enrollment, as assessed by the investigator
• Inability to understand or read the informed content