Direct coronary stent implantation: safety, feasibility, and predictors of success of the strategy of direct coronary stent implantation.

This prospective study was designed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, predictive factors of success, and 6-month follow-up of stent implantation without balloon predilatation (direct stenting) in 250 patients undergoing elective stent implantation. Balloon dilatation prior to stent implantation was a prerequisite to facilitate passage and deployment of the stent. Stent technology has changed tremendously, resulting in stents with improved properties, which may allow stent placement without prior balloon dilatation. Patients with coronary lesions suitable for elective stent implantation were included in this trial. Coronary interventions were undertaken predominantly via the transradial route using 6 Fr guiding catheters. Direct stent implantation was attempted using AVE GFX II coronary stent delivery systems. Upon failure, predilatation was undertaken before reattempting stent implantation. Patient data and ECGs were obtained from case records and from personal or telephone interviews 6 months after the procedure. Values were presented as mean +/- standard deviation. Student's t-test, two-tailed at 5% level of significance, was used to compare the difference of two means. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to establish predictive factors for failure of direct stenting. Two hundred and sixty-six direct stent implantations were attempted in 250 patients. Direct stenting was successful in 226 (85%) cases. Out of 40(15%) cases where direct stenting failed, balloon predilatation facilitated stent implantation in 39. In one lesion, stent implantation was not possible despite adequate predilatation. Predictive factors for failure of direct stenting on multivariate analysis were LCx lesions (P < 0.01), complex lesions (P < 0.01), and longer stents (P < 0.001). Minimal luminal diameter and percentage diameter stenosis of lesions in the successful and the failure group were not significantly different (0.94 +/- 0.39 mm vs. 0.84 +/- 0.41 mm, P = NS, and 70.2 +/- 11.2 vs. 73.2 +/- 11.2, P = NS). Stent loss occurred in five (2.0%) cases, with successful retrieval in four. One stent was lost permanently in a small branch of the radial artery. Post-percutaneous coronary intervention (post-PCI) myocardial infarction occurred in four (1.6%) patients. There were no other in-hospital events. Six-month-follow up information was obtained in 99% of patients. Subacute stent thrombosis was noted in four (1.6%) cases. Target vessel-related myocardial infarction rate was 3.2%, of which half was caused by subacute stent thrombosis. The overall reintervention rate (coronary artery bypass grafting or PCI) was 9.7%. Target lesion revascularization by PCI occurred in only 4.0%. At 6 months, overall mortality was 2.0%, of which 1.2% was due to coronary events. Direct stent implantation is safe and feasible in the majority of cases with low rate of complications. Unfavorable factors include circumflex lesion, more complex lesion morphology, and increasing length of stent. Severity of stenosis does not appear to be of predictive value. Long-term outcome is favorable with a low target lesion revascularization rate.     

Physiologically guided angioplasty in support to a provisional stenting strategy: immediate and six-month outcome.

The results of an observational multicenter angioplasty study suggested that stenting decisions may be facilitated by physiologic data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the early and long-term clinical and angiographic outcome of prospective physiologically guided provisional stenting. Coronary angioplasty using a Doppler-tipped angioplasty guidewire was performed in 68 patients. The provisional stent strategy dictated that balloon angioplasty was to be continued until a coronary flow reserve was >/= 2.2 with a residual diameter stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography < 35%. Repeat coronary angiography was obtained at 6 months. Based on the study criteria, 32/68 patients (47%) received a stent. Compared to the stent group, the angioplasty alone group had higher postprocedural stenosis (23% +/- 13% vs. 13% +/- 10%; P < 0. 05) and lower coronary vasodilatory reserve (2.3 +/- 0.4 vs. 2.6 +/- 0.7; P < 0.05). At follow-up (6.0 +/- 1.5 months), the angiographic restenosis rate was 39% in the angioplasty group and 35% in the stent groups (P = NS). Adverse cardiac events (unstable angina, target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, death) occurred in 19% and 18% (P = NS) of the angioplasty and stent patients, respectively. A prospective application of a physiologically guided provisional stent strategy for coronary angioplasty indicated that stent implantation may be required in approximately 50% of patients, an approach that produces similar clinical and angiographic long-term outcomes for stenting and guided angioplasty. These data support a role of coronary physiology as an adjunct in conducting an angioplasty procedure without obligatory stenting.     

Randomized comparison of balloon angioplasty versus silicon carbon-coated stent implantation for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries

The objectives of this study were to compare the short- and long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes of conventional balloon angioplasty versus elective silicon carbide-coated stent implantation in de novo lesions in small coronary arteries (<3.0 mm). Angioplasty of small coronary arteries is associated with high restenosis rates. The beneficial effects of stent implantation on restenosis rates and clinical outcomes have been suggested by observational studies. However, randomized trials comparing balloon angioplasty with stenting show conflicting results. A total of 496 patients with a de novo stenosis in a coronary artery, with a diameter between 2.0 and 3.0 mm, were randomly assigned to balloon angioplasty (n = 246) or stent implantation (n = 250). One-year clinical and 6-month angiographic follow-up were performed. Baseline characteristics were similar for the 2 groups, with 16% having diabetes and 77% complex lesions (type B or C). Crossover to stents occurred in 29% of patients randomized to balloon angioplasty. At 6 months, angiographic restenosis rates were 25% versus 21% for the angioplasty and stent groups, respectively (p = NS). One-year clinical follow-up showed no difference in occurrence of major adverse cardiac events. Elective silicon carbon-coated stent implantation in small coronary arteries is safe and effective, with no beneficial effect on angiographic or clinical outcome compared with balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting.     

Two "buddies" may be better than one: use of two buddy wires to expand an underexpanded left main coronary stent

Stent underexpansion is a catastrophic complication of stent implantation that can usually be treated with high-pressure balloon dilatation. We report a case of emergency, unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenting, in which the left main stent remained under-expanded in spite of multiple high-pressure balloon inflations, cutting balloon angioplasty, and angioplasty using one buddy wire. The stent eventually expanded after balloon angioplasty using a double buddy wire technique.     

Long-Term Restenosis After Multiple Stent Implantation: A Quantitative Angiographic Study

Elective high pressure stent implantation in focal coronary lesions has a high procedural success and low incidence of restenosis in comparison with balloon angioplasty. For the treatment of diffusely diseased coronary arteries, however, a high incidence of subacute thrombosis and late restenosis has been reported. The aim of this study was the prospective evaluation of procedural and long-term outcome after implantation of multiple stents. In a consecutive series of 48 patients, 48 lesions were treated with the implantation of 120 stents (2.5 ± 1.0 stents/lesion). Stent implantation was performed electively in 15%, for dissection in 56%, and for suboptimal balloon angioplasty result in 29% of patients. The lesion length before stenting, including balloon angioplasty induced dissections, was 28.5 ± 9.8 mm (range 20–62), the mean length of the stented segment was 40 ± 16 mm. The procedure was successful in 45 patients (95%). Procedural related complications included two urgent bypass operations (4%) and one transmural myocardial infarction (2%). Two subacute stent thrombosis events (4%) occurred, both in-hospital, 1 and 3 days after implantation. Follow-up was obtained in 43 eligible patients at 6.4 ± 1.3 months, revealing an overall restenosis rate of 30% (13 patients). Quantitative angiography (CAAS II, edge detection algorithm) showed a minimal lumen diameter of 0.93 ± 0.28 mm (diameter stenosis 62%± 13%) before treatment, 2.81 ± 0.26 mm (diameter stenosis –4 ± 13%) after stenting, and 1.79 ± 0.58 mm (diameter stenosis 30%± 20%) at follow-up. Predictors of restenosis were not identified. Thus, multiple stent implantation has high procedural success and the late restenosis of long lesions after multiple stents compares favorably with balloon angioplasty.     

Randomized comparison of coronary stenting with optimal balloon angioplasty for treatment of lesions in small coronary arteries.

AIMS: Angioplasty of lesions in small coronary arteries remains a significant problem because of the increased risk of restenosis. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of elective coronary stent placement and optimal balloon angioplasty in small vessel disease. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients with lesions in small coronary arteries (de novo, non-ostial lesion and reference diameter <3 mm) were randomly assigned to either balloon angioplasty or elective stent placement (7-cell NIR stent). The primary end-point was restenosis at 6 months follow-up. Optimal balloon angioplasty was defined as diameter stenosis less than or = 30% and the absence of major dissection after the angioplasty, and crossover to stenting was allowed. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the two groups. Procedure was successful in all patients, and in-hospital events did not occur in any patient. However, 12 patients in the angioplasty group were stented because of suboptimal results or major dissection. Postprocedural lumen diameter was significantly larger in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (2.44 +/- 0.36 mm vs 2.14 +/- 0.36, P<0.05, respectively), but late loss was greater in the stent group (1.12 +/- 0.67 mm vs 0.63 +/- 0.48, P<0.01, respectively). The angiographic restenosis rate was 30.9% in the angioplasty group, and 35.7% in the stent group (P = ns). Clinical follow-up was available in all patients (15.9 +/- 5.7 months) and clinical events during the follow-up were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that optimal balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting may be a reasonable approach for treatment of lesions in small coronary arteries.     

Long-term clinical and angiographic follow-up of patients treated with the self-expanding coronary stent for acute occlusion during balloon angioplasty of the right coronary artery.

A self-expanding coronary stent was implanted in 17 patients to treat acute occlusion of the right coronary artery after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. There were 2 women and 15 men, with a mean age of 59 +/- 8 years. All patients underwent at least one follow-up angiographic examination 4 to 6 months after implantation and six patients had additional follow-up angiography. During a mean follow-up interval of 32 +/- 10 months no patient died or had a myocardial infarction. Restenosis within the stent did not occur. Two patients had a new stenosis adjacent to the stent. Stent occlusion was found on follow-up angiography in one patient who had not been treated with an antiplatelet agent. The mean intraluminal diameter was 2.77 +/- 0.5 mm after implantation and 2.67 +/- 0.5 mm on follow-up angiography. It is concluded that coronary stenting is effective in treating right coronary artery occlusion after balloon angioplasty. Immediate and long-term outcome suggest that the right coronary artery may be a particularly favorable site for stent implantation.     

经皮介入治疗下肢动脉阻塞136例分析

目的评估下肢动脉严重狭窄患者经皮球囊成形术或选择性支架置入术的近中期临床疗效和安全性。方法连续136例下肢严重间歇性跛行或慢性缺血的患者,病因均为动脉粥样硬化,其中髂动脉阻塞81例,股浅动脉阻塞43例,胭动脉阻塞12例,所有病变首先均进行经皮球囊成形术,如果有夹层或残余狭窄〉30％,则置入支架。随访1年,在6个月和12个月时评估再狭窄和临床疗效。结果共进行36例经皮球囊成形术和99例选择性支架置入术。术前病变狭窄程度70％～100％（88．6％±7．5％）,狭窄长度1．5～18．0cm[（6．2±2．9）cm],治疗节段2．0～19.0cm[（7．3±3．2）cm],术后残余狭窄0％～30．0％（8．7％±5．1％）。手术相关的并发症2例。6个月随访发现,再狭窄率在髂动脉、股胭动脉和所有病变分别为7．3％、19．4％和12．3％,球囊成形术组和支架置入术组再狭窄率分别为17．8％比10．2％（P〉0．05）;12个月随访发现,再狭窄率在髂动脉、股胭动脉和所有病变分别为12．5％、29．9％和19．6％,球囊成形术组和支架置入术组再狭窄率分别为28．9％比16．1％（P〉0．05）。但6min最大步行距离和踝肱收缩压比球囊成形术组均显著小于支架置入术组（P〈0．001）。12个月随访期间发生急性心肌梗死3例和小卒中2例,无死亡病例。结论经皮介入治疗下肢动脉阻塞安全有效。中期疗效显示,选择性支架置入术组的再狭窄率与球囊成形术组相当,但6min最大步行距离和踝肱收缩压比优于球囊成形组。     

Physiological evaluation of the provisional side-branch intervention strategy for bifurcation lesions using fractional flow reserve.

AIMS: This study was performed to evaluate the functional outcomes of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided jailed side-branch (SB) intervention strategy. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and ten patients treated by provisional strategy were consecutively enrolled and SB FFR was measured in 91 patients. SB intervention was allowed when FFR was <0.75. FFR measurement was repeated after SB intervention and at 6-month follow-up angiography. In 26 of 28 SB lesions with FFR <0.75, balloon angioplasty (SB balloon/artery ratio = 0.84 +/- 0.14) was performed and FFR >or=0.75 was achieved in 92% of the lesions although the mean residual stenosis was 69 +/- 10%. During follow-up, there were no changes in SB FFR in lesions with (0.86 +/- 0.05 to 0.84 +/- 0.01, P = 0.4) and without SB angioplasty (0.87 +/- 0.06 to 0.89 +/- 0.07, P = 0.1). Functional restenosis (FFR <0.75) rate was only 8% (5/65). When clinical outcomes of these patients were compared with 110 patients with similar bifurcation lesions treated without FFR-guidance, there was no difference in 9-month cardiac event rates (4.6 vs. 3.7%, P = 0.7) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, FFR-guided SB intervention strategy resulted in good functional outcomes.     

A randomized comparison of the value of additional stenting after optimal balloon angioplasty for long coronary lesions: final results of the additional value of NIR stents for treatment of long coronary lesions (ADVANCE) study

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the clinical benefit of additional stent implantation after achieving an optimal result of balloon angioplasty (BA) in long coronary lesions (>20 mm). BACKGROUND: Long coronary lesions are associated with increased early complications and late restenosis after BA. Stenting improves the early outcome, but stent restenosis is also related to both lesion length and stent length. METHODS: A total of 437 patients with a single native lesion 20 to 50 mm in length were included and underwent BA, using long balloons matched to lesion length and vessel diameter (balloon/artery ratio 1.1) to achieve a diameter stenosis (DS) <30% by on-line quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). "Bail-out stenting" was performed for flow-limiting dissections or >50% DS. Patients in whom an optimal BA result was achieved were randomized to additional stenting (using NIR stents) or no stenting. The primary end point was freedom from major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at nine months, and core laboratory QCA was performed on serial angiograms. RESULTS: Bailout stenting was necessary in 149 patients (34%) and was associated with a significantly increased risk of peri-procedural infarction (p < 0.02). Among the 288 randomized patients, the mean lesion length was 27+/-9 mm, and the vessel diameter was 2.78+/-0.52 mm. The procedural success rate was 90% for the 143 patients assigned to BA alone (control group), as compared with 93% in the 145 patients assigned to additional stenting (stent group), which resulted in a superior early minimal lumen diameter (0.54 mm, p < 0.001) and led to reduced angiographic restenosis (27% vs. 42%, p = 0.022). Freedom from MACE at nine months was 77% in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of provisional stenting for long coronary lesions led to bailout stenting in one-third of patients, with a threefold increase in peri-procedural infarction. Additional stenting yielded a lower angiographic restenosis rate, but no reduction in MACE at nine months.     

Effect of cilostazol on restenosis after coronary angioplasty and stenting in comparison to conventional coronary artery stenting with ticlopidine

BACKGROUND: The role of antiplatelet therapy with ticlopidine plus aspirin in the prevention of subacute thrombosis after coronary artery stenting has been established. However, restenosis remains a major limitation in coronary artery stenting. METHODS: To compare the effect of cilostazol on restenosis after coronary angioplasty and stenting with that of ticlopidine after coronary artery stenting, 213 patients with 230 lesions who underwent successful coronary interventions were evaluated. Optimal results (residual stenosis less than 30%) were obtained by balloon angioplasty in 112 lesions, 64 lesions were treated with aspirin 81 mg/day (balloon-aspirin group) and 48 lesions with cilostazol 200 mg/day and aspirin 81 mg/day (balloon-cilostazol group). Stent implantation was performed in the remaining 118 lesions; 55 lesions were treated with ticlopidine 200 mg/day and aspirin 243 mg/day (stent-ticlopidine group) and 63 lesions with cilostazol 200 mg/day and aspirin 81 mg/day (stent-cilostazol group). Concomitant medications were continued for 4 to 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: No adverse events including acute occlusion and subacute thrombosis occurred in any groups. Although immediate gain and minimal lumen diameter immediately after angioplasty were significantly larger in stent groups than those in balloon groups, net gain at follow-up was significantly larger in cilostazol groups (1.54+/-0.83 mm in balloon-cilostazol group and 1.65+/-0.78 mm in stent-cilostazol group) than other groups (1.02+/-0.81 mm in balloon-aspirin group and 1.21+/-0.70 in stent-ticlopidine group) as a result of significantly lower late loss and loss index in cilostazol groups. The restenosis rate was significantly lower in cilostazol groups (12.5% in balloon-cilostazol group and 14.3% in stent-cilostazol group) than other groups (43.8% in balloon-aspirin group and 32.7% in stent-ticlopidine group). The rate of recurrent angina was significantly lower in cilostazol groups (4.3% in balloon-cilostazol group and 1.9% in stent-cilostazol group) than in other groups (17.5% in balloon-aspirin group and 14.0% in stent-ticlopidine groups). CONCLUSIONS: Both optimal balloon angioplasty with cilostazol and coronary artery stenting with cilostazol have a potential to reduce restenosis compared with optimal balloon angioplasty with aspirin or conventional coronary artery stenting with ticlopidine plus aspirin.     

Effect of intracoronary stenting on intimal dissection after balloon angioplasty: results of quantitative and qualitative coronary analysis

The effect of the Palmaz-Schatz stent on the angiographic appearance and residual luminal stenosis in patients with intimal dissection after balloon angioplasty was evaluated in 84 consecutive patients (90 lesions). Coronary angiography was performed before angioplasty, after conventional angioplasty and after stent implantation. The degree of intimal disruption was assessed as follows: grade 0, no dissection; grade 1, simple dissection (intraluminal linear defect or extraluminal cap extravasation); or grade 2, complex dissection (nonlinear spiral defect or luminal defect with multiple irregular borders). Quantitative coronary analysis of digitized cineangiograms was performed with use of a computerized automatic edge detection algorithm. After balloon angioplasty, 31 (34%) of 90 lesions demonstrated intimal dissection (18 simple, 13 complex). After stent implantation, intimal dissection improved by greater than or equal to 1 grade in 29 (94%) of the 31 lesions with 27 (87%) reduced to grade 0 (that is, no dissection). Dissection grade improved after stenting in 16 (89%) of 18 simple dissections and in all 13 complex dissections. Mean diameter stenosis was 77 +/- 17% before angioplasty, 47 +/- 17% after angioplasty and 14 +/- 10% after stenting (before angioplasty vs. after angioplasty and after angioplasty vs. after stenting, p less than 0.0001). In conclusion, intracoronary stenting is effective in reducing the residual luminal stenosis and in improving the angiographic appearance of intimal dissections after conventional balloon angioplasty.     

Physiologic assessment of jailed side branch lesions using fractional flow reserve

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to evaluate the feasibility of the physiologic assessment of jailed side branches using fractional flow reserve (FFR) and to compare the measured FFR with the stenosis severity assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). BACKGROUND: It is not well-known which side branches should be treated after stent implantation at main branches and how to assess the functional significance of these lesions. METHODS: Ninety-seven jailed side branch lesions (vessel size > 2.0 mm, percent stenosis > 50% by visual estimation) after stent implantation at main branches were consecutively enrolled. The FFR was measured using a pressure wire at 5 mm distal and proximal to the ostial lesion of the jailed side branch. RESULTS: The FFR measurement was successful in 94 lesions. Mean FFRs were 0.94 +/- 0.04 and 0.85 +/- 0.11 at the main branches and jailed side branches, respectively. There was a negative correlation between the percent stenosis and FFR (r = -0.41, p < 0.001). However, no lesion with < 75% stenosis had FFR < 0.75. Among 73 lesions with > or = 75% stenosis, only 20 lesions were functionally significant. CONCLUSIONS: The FFR measurement in jailed side branch lesions is both safe and feasible. Quantitative coronary angiography is unreliable in the assessment of the functional severity of jailed side branch lesions, and measurement of FFR suggests that most of these lesions do not have functional significance.     

Clinical significance of fractional flow reserve for evaluation of functional lesion severity in stent restenosis and native coronary arteries

OBJECTIVE: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a valid surrogate for hemodynamic significance in stenotic native coronary arteries, but its validity in patients with coronary stent restenosis is unknown. DESIGN: Prospective. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: We studied 42 patients (mean age +/- 1 SD, 62 +/- 10 years) with stent restenosis and 57 patients (mean age, 61 +/- 12 years) with a native coronary lesion. All patients demonstrated a single coronary lesion of intermediate severity (stenosis diameter, 40 to 70%). Determination of FFR and quantitative angiography of the stenosis were performed. RESULTS: Stenosis diameter was comparable in both groups (native, 52 +/- 11%; stent, 52 +/- 9%; not significant [NS]). FFR was lower in stent restenosis (0.77 +/- 0.15 vs 0.82 +/- 0.12, p < 0.05) and more often pathologic with an FFR < 0.75 (48% vs 26%, p < 0.05) compared to native coronary stenosis. However, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for native stenosis was 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.94) and for stent restenosis was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.97; NS). In patients with an FFR > 0.75, there was no adverse coronary event that was related to the stented lesion in the subsequent 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The threshold of stenosis diameter of coronary lesions for pathologic FFR measurement (FFR < 0.75) is similar for stent restenosis and native coronary stenosis. Thus, FFR measurement seems to be applicable for decision making in patients with stent restenosis.     

Clinical and angiographic follow-up after balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting for coronary in-stent restenosis.

The objective of this study was to assess the angiographic and clinical outcome of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis treated with balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting. The study included 375 consecutive patients with in-stent restenosis managed with balloon angioplasty alone or combined with stenting. Clinical events were recorded during a 1-year follow-up period and quantitative analysis was performed on 6-month angiographic data. Of the 373 patients (451 lesions) with a successful procedure, 273 were treated with angioplasty alone and 100 with additional stenting. Target lesion revascularization was required in 23.7% of the patients: 20.7% in patients with angioplasty and 31.0% in patients with stenting. Angiographic restenosis rate was 38.9%: 35.8% in the angioplasty group and 47.7% in the stent group. Stenting in small vessels was associated with a much higher restenosis rate than in larger vessels (65.6% vs. 37.5%, respectively; P = 0.01). Thus, repeat balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting for in-stent restenosis is a safe treatment strategy associated with a relatively favorable long-term outcome. However, the long-term results might be improved if additional stenting is avoided especially in small vessels. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 48:151-156, 1999.     

经桡动脉行复杂冠状动脉病变的介入治疗

目的探讨经桡动脉行复杂冠状动脉病变介入治疗的可行性。方法将178例左主干开口病变、分叉病变、慢性闭塞病变、长度≥30mm的长病变、纡曲成角病变及严重钙化病变等复杂冠状动脉病变患者经桡动脉途径进行PCI。结果经桡动脉PCI完成率97.2%。因导引导管支撑力不够,采用双导丝技术18例,采用子母导管技术5例,微导管技术6例,锚技术3例。左主干开口病变8处即刻全部成功。左主干分叉病变双支架置入17例,单支架置入9例。其他分叉病变67处,单支架置入47处,双支架置入20处。双支架置入后对吻球囊扩张成功率100%。34处慢性闭塞病变PCI成功27处。长度≥30mm的长病变91处、纡曲成角病变23处、严重钙化病变27处全部PCI成功。术中支架内血栓2例,住院期间亚急性血栓形成2例。死亡1例。穿刺处并发症:桡动脉闭塞8例,前臂肿胀4例,无血肿及神经损伤。结论经桡动脉途径进行冠状动脉复杂病变的PCI有较高的成功率。     

Quantitative angiographic comparison of the immediate success of coronary angioplasty, coronary atherectomy and endoluminal stenting

Coronary atherectomy and coronary stenting effectively reduce the severity of coronary artery stenoses, but direct comparisons of these interventions with conventional balloon angioplasty have not been performed. To compare the immediate efficacy of these 3 interventions, the angiographic morphology and the severity of the residual coronary stenosis were quantitatively evaluated in 18 patients undergoing coronary atherectomy and in 21 patients treated by endoluminal coronary stenting. Each of these groups of patients was compared with a matched group of coronary angioplasty patients selected from a large, computerized data-base. The variables matched included patient age and sex, lesions site and severity, and lesion complexity. Both coronary atherectomy and coronary stenting more effectively reduced the severity of the coronary stenosis when compared with balloon angioplasty. The luminal diameter stenosis was reduced from 69 +/- 10 to 22 +/- 20% in the atherectomy group compared with a reduction from 74 +/- 11 to 44 +/- 14% in the matched coronary angioplasty population (p = 0.008). Similarly, the luminal diameter stenosis was reduced from 77 +/- 11 to 26 +/- 12% in the stented group compared with a reduction from 81 +/- 10 to 42 +/- 14% in the matched coronary angioplasty group (p = 0.014). In addition, moderate or severe coronary dissections were noted more frequently in the coronary angioplasty groups than in their respective atherectomy and stent groups (0 vs 33%, p = 0.008, and 5 vs 19%, p = 0.15, respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Provisional stenting for multivessel PCI

Background: Bare stents reduce acute complications and repeat revascularization following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but are costly and may lead to in‐stent restenosis. It remains unclear whether stents should be universally implanted or whether provisional stenting mainly to suboptimal balloon dilatation results is an acceptable approach for multivessel PCI. Objective: To compare the long‐term clinical restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) of stented and non‐stented coronary artery lesions in patients who had multivessel PCI. Methods: We performed retrospective analysis of matched data from 129 consecutive patients who underwent multivessel PCI (at least optimal balloon angioplasty to one coronary artery segment and balloon angioplasty plus stenting to another coronary artery in the same patient, all lesions are de novo native coronary artery lesions with vessel diameter ?2.5?mm). The study endpoint was restenosis and repeat revascularization at one‐year follow‐up. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. Low in‐hospital MACE (3.1%). Acute myocardial infarction, emergency revascularization via either PCI or CABG was detected and angiographic success was achieved in 99.3% of lesions in both groups. The rate of clinically driven angiographic restenosis and TLR at one‐year (follow‐up?100%) was similar (17.1% versus 18.6%, P?=?0.871, and 13.9% versus 16.3%, P?=?0.728, for optimal balloon angioplasty versus provisional stenting. Conclusions: The main findings from this study are that long‐term angiographic restenosis and TLR was comparable for optimal balloon angioplasty and provisional stenting, suggesting that provisional stenting is an acceptable approach for multivessel PCI.     

Fractional Flow Reserve: Who Needs the Pressure Wire?

Recently, the interest in coronary pressure measurements has been revived thanks to technical innovations (the development of pressure-measuring angioplasty guidewire) and theoretical progress (the concept of pressure derived fractional flow reserve). Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the ratio of maximal flow in the myocardial region depending on a stenosis to maximal flow in that same region if the stenosis were absent. With the development of pressure guidewires, fractional flow reserve can be calculated rapidly and safely in the diagnostic and interventional setting. It has been shown that pressure derived FFR can be used as a surrogate for a stress test for on-line clinical decision making in the catheterization laboratory. Values < 0.75 are most often associated with exercise-inducible myocardial ischemia, while values > 0.75 exclude objective signs of ischemia during exercise. The accuracy of FFR for that purpose is approximately 95% and higher than that of any single noninvasive test taken alone. Of note, it has been shown that prognosis is favorable in patients in whom a planned angioplasty was deferred on the basis of a myocardial fractional flow reserve > 0.75. After regular balloon angioplasty, the combination of a good angiographic result and a FFR > 0.90 is associated with an event rate during a 2-year follow-up, which is similar to that after stenting. After stent implantation, FFR should normalize. A FFR < 0.94 after stent implantation appears to be as accurate as intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to detect stent malposition. Thus, pressure derived FFR is a well-validated index of stenosis severity that has evolved from a physiological index to a clinical tool.     

Provisional stenting strategies: systematic overview and implications for clinical decision-making

Coronary stents reduce the rates of abrupt closure, emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery and restenosis, but do not prevent myocardial infarction or death at six months. The financial burden of increased stent use and the difficulty in managing in-stent restenosis have provided the impetus to develop provisional stenting strategies. Patients at low risk for restenosis after balloon angioplasty may not derive additional benefit from stent implantation and may be successfully managed with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) alone. Numerous patient, lesion and procedural predictors of restenosis have been identified. Postprocedural assessment using quantitative coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), coronary flow velocity reserve (CVR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) may further enhance the ability to predict adverse outcomes after PTCA. Several studies have been performed to investigate the feasibility of provisional stenting strategies using various modalities to identify low risk patients who could be managed with PTCA alone. An optimal or "stent-like" angiographic result after PTCA is associated with favorable clinical outcomes. Preliminary results of studies using IVUS or CVR to guide provisional stenting appear promising. Angiography alone may be inadequate to identify truly low risk patients and may need to be combined with clinical factors, assessment of recoil, IVUS or physiologic indexes. Strategies that avoid unnecessary stenting in even a small proportion of patients may have large impacts on health care costs. Provisional stenting may potentially reduce costs and rates of in-stent restenosis without compromising the quality of health care delivery.