Date:2014-4-14
The 12th China Interventional Therapeutics Conference (CIT) was held from 20th to 23rd March in Shanghai. SINOMED hosted a Luncheon Symposium during CIT. The content is separated into two parts: 2nd generation BuMA™ developing oversea and BuMA™ homeland. Prof. Renu Virmani MD. who is a famous pathologist from USA illustrated the animal study. All results show that BuMA™ has a perfect endothelialization. And then Prof. Patrick Serruys introduced a new study design of the multi-centre FIM- trial comparing 2nd generation BuMA™ with Resolute Integrity™. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of 2nd generation BuMA™ as compared to Resolute™ stent in reducing restenosis in patients with de novo coronary artery disease. 9-month angiographic late loss will be observed between the two types of stent. This study will initiate in European countries.(Click here for full presentation)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8ecd9/8ecd999996ac4f2a46bd906e5be88f8d98cd9153" alt="3_1920"
Prof. Jianping Li from Peking University First Hospital shared thelatest progress regarding PANDA-II real-world registry trial of BuMA™ with 58 participating centers in China. In total, 2699 patients have enrolled since 2011. Preliminary results have shown a 6-month MACE event of 0.33% (9 cases) and probable ST of 0.15% (4 cases). Other secondary endpoints are undue or without occurrence. And implantation success rate reached 100%. Prof. Jianping Li concluded that BuMA™ demonstrates superior instant safety and efficacy.
Prof. Jie Qian from Fu Wai cardiology center illustrated PANDA-III and BuMA™ OCT. This trial is compared BuMA™ to EXCEL™. The aim of the study is to compare early (3 months) neointimal formation between the two Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents, both of which have 316L Stainless steel platform and release sirolimus, but with different biodegradable coating designs. And use OCT result as a criteria to compare. The results showed significant difference between two groups (94.18% vs. 89.98%, BuMA™ vs. EXCEL™, p<0.0001), favorable for BuMA™. This is suspected to be contributed by BuMA™’s unique eG™ coating technology. At the same time, duration and composition of DAPT treatment after these two types of DES might be different. However, large-scale trial is required to further confirm the real clinical difference.