切割球囊与常规球囊在冠状动脉支架内再狭窄治疗作用的比较

目的比较切割球囊与常规球囊对冠状动脉支架内再狭窄治疗的效果。方法将2 66例单支冠状动脉病变支架内再狭窄患者分别用切割球囊与常规球囊进行扩张治疗,并在治疗即刻及6个月时再次行冠状动脉造影并进行定量分析。结果①切割球囊与常规球囊治疗即刻所获得的冠状动脉支架内最大血管直径无显著性差异[分别为( 2 5 1±0 65 )、( 2 5 3±0 65 )mm ,P >0 0 5 ]。②6个月后切割球囊所治疗后的冠状动脉支架内血管直径高于常规球囊治疗组,但无显著性差异(P>0 0 5 )。③切割球囊晚期血管丢失量明显低于常规球囊治疗组(P <0 0 5 )。结论与常规球囊相比,切割球囊并不能增加冠状动脉支架内即刻及6个月时靶血管的最大直径,但晚期血管丢失量明显降低,且有定位准确、不易滑动等优点。

THE COMPARSION OF CUTTING BALLOON ANGIOGRAPHY AND CONVENTIONAL TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY IN TREATMENT OF IN-STENT RESTENOSIS

Objective To determine if the cutting balloon angioplasty has advantages over conventional balloon percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). Methods A total of 266 lesions treated for ISR were divided into two groups according to the treatment strategy: conventional balloon PTCA and cutting balloon angioplasty. Angiogram obtained during the procedure and 6 month after the two interventions, and quantitative angiograpic analysis was performed. Results ①Immediately after intervention, the maxium luminal diameter(MLD) in cutting balloon angioplasty group was similar to the one achieved of conventional balloon angioplasty[(2.51±0.65) vs (2.53±0.65) mm, P>0.05]. ②At six-month follow-up, the MLD has no significant change between the conventional balloon PTCA group and the cutting balloon angioplasty group [(1.75±0.83) vs (1.96±0.74) mm, P>0.05]. ③The cutting balloon angioplasty group has a lower late lumen loss(P<0.05). Conclusion We conclude that cutting balloon angioplasty did not increase the MLD immediately after intervention and at 6-month follow-up as compared with conventional balloon angioplasty in the treatment of in-stent restenosis, but with a less late lumen loss.