***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: AIMS We evaluated the feasibility and the acute performance of the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds ( BVS ) for the treatment of patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infa rct ion ( STEMI ) . METHODS AND RESULTS The present investigation is a prospect i ve , single-arm , single-centre study , reporting data after the  BVS implantation in STEMI patients . Quantitative coronary angiography and optical coherence tomography ( OCT ) data were evaluated . Clinical outcomes are reported at the 30-day follow-up . The intent-to-treat population comprises a total of 49 patients . The procedural success was 97.9 % . Pre-procedure TIMI-flow was 0 in 50.0 % of the patients ; after the BVS implantation , a TIMI-flow III was achieved in 91.7 % of patients and the post-procedure percentage diameter stenosis was 14.7 ± 8.2 % . No patients had angiographically visible residual thrombus at the end of the procedure . Optical coherence tomography analysis performed in 31 patients showed that the post-procedure mean lumen area was 8.02 ± 1.92 mm(2 ) , minimum lumen area 5.95 ± 1.61 mm(2 ) , mean incomplete scaffold apposition area 0.118 ± 0.162 mm(2 ) , mean intraluminal defect area 0.013 ± 0.017 mm(2 ) , and mean percentage malapposed struts per patient 2.80 ± 3.90 % . Scaffolds with > 5 % malapposed struts were 7 . At the 30-day follow-up , target-lesion failure rate was 0 % . Non-target-vessel revascularization and target-vessel myocardial infa rct ion ( MI ) were reported . A non-target-vessel non-Q-wave MI occurred . No cases of cardiac death or scaffold thrombosis were observed . CONCLUSION In the present series , the BVS implantation  in patients presenting with acute MI appeared feasible , with high rate of final TIMI-flow III and good scaffold apposition . Larger studies are currently needed to confirm these preliminary data Objective of this study was to assess the clinical performance of bioresorbable vascular scaffold ( BVS ) compared to everolimus-eluting stent ( EES ) in subjects with ST-segment elevation myocardial infa rct ion ( STEMI ) . We included all consecutive patients with STEMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention ( PCI ) with BVS implantation in centers participating to the Italian ABSORB Prospect i ve Registry ( BVS-RAI ) and PCI with EES in the same centers during the same period . The 2 groups were compared . The primary end point was patient-oriented composite end point ( POCE ) including cardiac death , myocardial infa rct ion , and target lesion revascularization ( TLR ) at the longest available follow-up . BVS or EES thrombosis at follow-up was also evaluated . Of the 563 patients with STEMI included , 122 received BVS and 441 EES .  Procedural success was obtained in 549 ( 97.5 % ) cases without significant differences between the 2 groups ( BVS 99.3 % vs EES 97.0 % , p = 0.2 ) . At a median of 220-day ( interquartile range 178 to 369 ) follow-up , no significant differences were observed in terms of POCE ( BVS 4.9 % vs EES 7.0 % , p = 0.4 ) ; death ( BVS 0.8 % , EES 2.0 % , p = 0.4 ) , MI ( BVS 4.1 % , EES 2.0 % , p = 0.2 ) , TLR ( BVS 4.1 % , EES 4.5 % , p = 0.8 ) , device thrombosis ( BVS 2.5 % , EES 1.4 % , p = 0.4 ) . All TLR cases were successfully managed with re-PCI in both groups . A propensity matching of the study population s showed no significant differences regarding POCE at the longest available follow-up ( odds ratio 0.53 , 0.1 to 4.3 ) . In conclusion , in this direct prospect i ve comparison , BVS was associated with similar clinical results compared to EES in the STEMI setting . Larger and adequately powered r and omized trials are needed to fully assess the potential clinical benefit of BVS versus the current st and ard of care in patients with STEMI Aims Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds ( BVSs ) have been studied in chronic coronary artery disease , but not in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infa rct ion ( STEMI ) . This prospect i ve multicentre study analysed the feasibility and safety of BVS implantation during primary percutaneous coronary intervention ( p-PCI ) in STEMI . Methods and results Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation became the default strategy for all consecutive STEMI patients between 15 December 2012 and 30 August 2013 . A total of 142 patients underwent p-PCI ; 41 of them ( 28.9 % ) fulfilled the inclusion /exclusion criteria for BVS implantation . The BVS device success was 98 % , thrombolysis in myocardial infa rct ion 3 flow was restored in 95 % of patients , and acute scaffold recoil was 9.7 % . An optical coherence tomography ( OCT ) sub study ( 21 patients ) demonstrated excellent procedural results with only a 1.1 % rate of scaffold strut malapposition . Edge dissections were present in a 38 % of patients , but were small and clinical ly silent . Reference vessel diameter measured by quantitative coronary angiography was significantly lower than that measured by OCT by 0.29 ( ±0.56 ) mm , P = 0.028 . Clinical outcomes were compared between BVS group and Control group ; the latter was formed by patients who had implanted metallic stent and were in Killip Class I or II . Combined clinical endpoint was defined as death , myocardial infa rct ion , or target vessel revascularization . Event-free survival was the same in both groups ; 95 % for BVS and 93 % for Control group , P = 0.674 . Conclusion Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in acute STEMI is feasible and safe . The procedural results evaluated by angiography and OCT are excellent . The early clinical results are encouraging BACKGROUND The currently recommended duration of dual antiplatelet therapy ( DAPT ) in drug-eluting stent ( DES ) recipients is 12 months to reduce the risk of late stent thrombosis , particularly in those with acute coronary syndrome ( ACS ) . OBJECTIVES This study hypothesized that antiplatelet treatment with DAPT for 6 months may be noninferior to 24-month DAPT in aspirin-sensitive patients . METHODS A multicenter , r and omized study assigned patients undergoing implantation of everolimus-eluting stents with confirmed nonresistance to aspirin to receive 6- or 24-month DAPT . The primary endpoint was a composite of death , myocardial infa rct ion , urgent target vessel revascularization , stroke , and major bleeding at 12 months post-stenting . RESULTS A total of 2,031 patients were enrolled in 70 European and Middle Eastern centers . The trial was prematurely terminated due to recruitment problems , leaving 941 patients r and omized to 24-month DAPT and 953 to 6-month DAPT . The 2 treatment groups had similar baseline and procedural characteristics . There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint ( 24-month : 1.5 % vs. 6-month : 1.6 % ; p = 0.85 ) . Noninferiority was demonstrated for 6- versus 24-month DAPT , with an absolute risk difference of 0.11 % ( 95 % confidence interval : -1.04 % to 1.26 % ; p for noninferiority = 0.0002 ) . There were no significant differences in stent thrombosis or bleeding complications . In the 792 ( 44 % ) high-risk patients with ACS , primary and secondary endpoints did not significantly differ ( hazard ratio : 1.7 [ 95 % confidence interval : 0.519 to 6.057 ; p = 0.361 ] ) . CONCLUSIONS Rates of bleeding and thrombotic events were not significantly different according to 6- versus 24-month DAPT after PCI with new-generation DES in good aspirin responders . ( Is There A LIfe for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel [ ITALICplus ] ; NCT01476020 ) AIMS To assess observations with multimodality imaging of the Absorb bioresorbable everolimus-eluting vascular scaffold performed in two consecutive cohorts of patients who were serially investigated either at 6 and 24 months or at 12 and 36 months . METHODS AND RESULTS In the ABSORB multicentre single-arm trial , 45 patients ( cohort B1 ) and 56 patients ( cohort B2 ) underwent serial invasive imaging , specifically quantitative coronary angiography ( QCA ) , intravascular ultrasound ( IVUS ) , radiofrequency backscattering ( IVUS-VH ) and optical coherence tomography ( OCT ) . Between one and three years , late luminal loss remained unchanged ( 6 months : 0.19 mm , 1 year : 0.27 mm , 2 years : 0.27 mm , 3 years : 0.29 mm ) and the in-segment angiographic restenosis rate for the entire cohort B ( n=101 ) at three years was 6 % . On IVUS , mean lumen , scaffold , plaque and vessel area showed enlargement up to two years . Mean lumen and scaffold area remained stable between two and three years whereas significant reduction in plaque behind the struts occurred with a trend toward adaptive restrictive remodelling of EEM . Hyperechogenicity of the vessel wall , a surrogate of the bioresorption process , decreased from 23.1 % to 10.4 % with a reduction of radiofrequency backscattering for dense calcium and necrotic core . At three years , the count of strut cores detected on OCT increased significantly , probably reflecting the dismantling of the scaffold ; 98 % of struts were covered . In the entire cohort B ( n=101 ) , the three-year major adverse cardiac event rate was 10.0 % without any scaffold thrombosis . CONCLUSIONS The current investigation demonstrated the dynamics of vessel wall changes after implantation of a bioresorbable scaffold , result ing at three years in stable luminal dimensions , a low restenosis rate and a low clinical major adverse cardiac events rate . CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION http://www . clinical trials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00856856 BACKGROUND Safety and efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds ( BRS ) and the role of postdilatation on outcome in acute coronary syndrome ( ACS ) patients compared with those of everolimus-eluting stents ( EES ) remain unknown . The aim of the study is to compare the safety and efficacy of BRS with EES in ACS and to investigate the role of BRS postdilatation . METHODS Consecutive ACS patients undergoing BRS implantation in 8 centers were com-pared with those with EES  before and after propensity score matching . Major adverse cardiac event ( MACE ) , myocardial infa rct ion , and target lesion revascularization ( TLR ) were the primary endpoint . Sensitivity analysis was performed according to postdilatation after BRS implantation . We enrolled 303 BRS and 748 EES patients ; 215 from each group were com-pared after matching , and 117 ( 55.2 % ) BRS patients were treated with postdilatation . RESULTS After a median follow-up of 24.0 months , MACE rates were higher in BRS patients than in EES patients ( 9.3 % vs. 4.7 % , p < 0.001 ) , mainly driven by TLR ( 6.1 % vs. 1.9 % , p < 0.001 ) . Stent thrombosis increased in the BRS group ( 2.8 % vs. 0.9 % , p = 0.01 ) . How-ever , after sensitivity analysis , MACE rates in BRS patients with postdilatation were signifi-cantly lower than in those without , comparable to EES patients ( 6.0 % vs. 12.6 % vs. 4.7 % , p < 0.001 ) . The same trend was observed for TLR ( 3.4 % vs. 8.4 % vs. 1.9 % , p < 0.001 ) . Stent thrombosis rates were higher in both the BRS groups than in EES patients ( 2.6 % vs. 3.2 % vs. 0.9 % , p = 0.045 ) . CONCLUSIONS Postdilatation appears effective when using BRS in ACS patients . MACE rates are comparable to those of EES , although scaffold thrombosis is not negligible . R and omized prospect i ve studies are required for further investigation BACKGROUND Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended after coronary stenting to prevent thrombot 
    Output:
    
Although there was a trend toward an increase in scaffold thrombosis in the largest controlled registries , no statistically significant increase was found .
Current clinical data are scarce , but suggest that BVS might represent a reasonable alternative to drug-eluting stents in STEMI patients .