title: Current controversies over bioresorbable scaffolds.
abstract: The field of coronary intervention has made great strides since the first balloon angioplasty performed by Andreas Gruentzig in Zurich in 1977.1 Starting with that case, coronary interventional data has been rigorously generated through single-center and multicenter registries and randomized trials, allowing for remarkably broad-sweeping, evidence-based, leapfrog improvements in technology and outcomes in just a few decades. In this paper we outline the natural evolution from "plain old balloon angioplasty" (POBA) to bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) and other novel therapies, and discuss the emerging data regarding the promise of BRS as well as controversies and residual concerns regarding this technology.
authors.affiliation: Columbia University Medical Center, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA - zraval9@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Z
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Raval
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kirtane
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Moses
mesh_terms: D020341:Absorbable Implants; D015906:Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary / Q000379:methods*; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D054457:Tissue Scaffolds