[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-437224-105":59,"doc-detail-437224-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","revisiting-bioresorbable-scaffolds-in-light-of-the-scaar-study","Revisiting Bioresorbable Scaffolds in Light of the SCAAR Study","","Letter to the editor revisits long-term findings from the SCAAR analysis of bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Early scaffold thrombosis (~3%) and restenosis (~7%) were noted, yet myocardial infarction declined by ~25% after 3 years, supporting the concept of vascular restoration. Age is proposed to modulate benefit, with patients ≥70 facing higher early risk and limited long-term advantage, while younger patients may gain from scaffold resorption and restored vasomotor function. Emerging magnesium-based and sirolimus-eluting platforms may improve early safety and enable durable outcomes, but BRS should not replace drug-eluting stents universally; careful patient selection is emphasized.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/revisiting-bioresorbable-scaffolds-in-light-of-the-scaar-study/437224/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/revisiting-bioresorbable-scaffolds-in-light-of-the-scaar-study/437224.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Stanford","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",13,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What key long-term outcomes are discussed from the SCAAR analysis of BRS?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"The letter notes early scaffold thrombosis (~3%) and restenosis (~7%), while myocardial infarction decreased by about 25% beyond 3 years, suggesting benefit through vascular restoration.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"How does age affect the potential benefit of bioresorbable scaffolds?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"Patients aged ≥70 years reportedly have higher early risk with no clear long-term advantage, whereas younger patients may benefit from scaffold resorption and improved vasomotor function.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"Which emerging BRS platforms are highlighted and what is the proposed clinical implication?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"Magnesium-based scaffolds (DREAMS 3G) and sirolimus-eluting bioadaptors (BIODAPTOR-RCT) are described as having improved procedural safety and lower early adverse events versus Absorb, with the goal of enabling meaningful long-term vascular restoration.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},437224,1790963409,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":8,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":81,"preview_page_count":4},2336477552062,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_994ba38a5ba835b3df7d355c54d3ed8d","Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions 4 (2025) 104050  \nLetter to the Editor  \nRevisiting Bioresorbable Scaffolds in Light of the SCAAR Study  \nThe long-term SCAAR analysis by Saidi-Seresht et al1 providesan important perspective on bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) . Although early scaffold thrombosis (~3%) and restenosis (~7%) were observed, myocardial infarction rates declined by approximately 25% beyond 3 years, highlighting the potential of vascular restoration and suggesting that the concept of “leaving nothing behind” may yet hold promise.  \nAge appears to modify this benefit. Patients aged ≥70 years experienced higher early risk without clear long-term advantage, likely reflecting more calcified vessels, impaired endothelial repair, and limited life expectancy. Younger patients, in contrast, may uniquely benefit from scaffold resorption and restored vasomotor function. This observation emphasizes that BRS outcomes are inherently patient-and time-dependent.  \nEmerging platforms offer a hopeful path forward. Magnesiumbased scaffolds (DREAMS 3G) and sirolimus-eluting bioadaptors (BIODAPTOR-RCT) have demonstrated improved procedural safety and lower early adverse events compared with Absorb.2,3 If these devices maintain safety while enabling meaningful long-term vascular restoration, they may allow BRS to fulfill the promise originally envisioned.  \nClinically, BRS should not be viewed as a one-size-fits-all alternative to drug-eluting stents. Thoughtful patient selection—avoiding elderly or high-risk anatomies and focusing on younger, lower-risk individuals—may allow us to realize the potential of this innovative approach while preserving safety.  \nTirayut Veerasathian, MD  \nDepartment of Surgery, Buriram Hospital, Buriram, Thailand  \nSchawanya K. Rattanapitoon, MD*  \nFMC Medical Center of Thailand, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand  \nNav La, MD, PhD  \nFaculty of Pediatrics and Medicine, International University, Phnom Penh, Cambodia  \nNathkapach K. Rattanapitoon, PhD  \nFMC Medical Center of Thailand, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand  \n* Corresponding author: [schawanya.ratt@g.sut.ac.th](schawanya.ratt@g.sut.ac.th) (S.K. Rattanapitoon)  \nDeclaration of competing interest  \nThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.  \nFunding sources  \nThis work was not supported by funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.  \nEthics statement and patient consent  \nThis article does not report on patients or patient data. Ethical approval and patient consent were not required.  \nReferences  \n1. Saidi-Seresht S, von Koch S, Erlinge D, James S, Koul S, Grimfj€ard P. Long-term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention using Absorb bioresorbable scaffold: A SCAAR study. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025;4:103724. [https://](https://)[ ](https://)[doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2025.103724](doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2025.103724)  \n2. Haude M, Wlodarczak A, van der Schaaf RJ, et al. A new resorbable magnesium scaffold for de novo coronary lesions (DREAMS 3): one-year results of the BIOMAG-I first-in-human study. EuroIntervention. 2023;19(5):e414–e422 . [https://](https://)[ ](https://)[doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00326](doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00326)  \n3. Saito S, Bennett J, Nef HM, et al. First randomised controlled trial comparing the sirolimus-eluting bioadaptor with the zotarolimus-eluting drug-eluting stent in patients with de novo coronary artery lesions: 12-month clinical and imaging data from the multi-centre, international, BIODAPTOR-RCT. EClinicalMedicine. 2023;65:102304. [https://doi.org/](https://doi.org/)[ ](https://doi.org/)[10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102304](10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102304)  \n[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2025.104050](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2025.104050)  \nReceived 26 September 2025; Accepted 3 October 2025; Available online 11 November 2025  \n2772-9303/© 2025 The Author(s) . Publ","cbCaip5u9RoCYp6t","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaip5u9RoCYp6t","pdf",1649204,"English","# Reappraisal of long-term SCAAR outcomes\n## Age-dependent benefit\n## Future directions with emerging scaffold platforms\n## Clinical positioning and patient selection","[{\"question\":\"What key long-term outcomes are discussed from the SCAAR analysis of BRS?\",\"answer\":\"The letter notes early scaffold thrombosis (~3%) and restenosis (~7%), while myocardial infarction decreased by about 25% beyond 3 years, suggesting benefit through vascular restoration.\"},{\"question\":\"How does age affect the potential benefit of bioresorbable scaffolds?\",\"answer\":\"Patients aged ≥70 years reportedly have higher early risk with no clear long-term advantage, whereas younger patients may benefit from scaffold resorption and improved vasomotor function.\"},{\"question\":\"Which emerging BRS platforms are highlighted and what is the proposed clinical implication?\",\"answer\":\"Magnesium-based scaffolds (DREAMS 3G) and sirolimus-eluting bioadaptors (BIODAPTOR-RCT) are described as having improved procedural safety and lower early adverse events versus Absorb, with the goal of enabling meaningful long-term vascular restoration.\"}]","Revisiting Bioresorbable Scaffolds in Light of the SCAAR Study | PDF",1790680708]