Technical feasibility,safety, and clinical outcome of stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation narrowing

This study was performed to evaluate the acute and long-term results of stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation lesions. Sixty-three consecutive patients with an unprotected LMCA bifurcation lesion and normal left ventricular function were included. Stenting was performed with (n = 32) or without debulking atherectomy (n = 31) at the operator's discretion. Slotted-tube stents, coil stents, or bifurcation stents were used. The procedural success rate was 100%. In-hospital events including stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and emergency bypass surgery did not occur in any patients. The angiographic follow-up rate was 86% (43 of the 50 eligible patients), and the restenosis rate was 28% (parent vessel only 14%, side branch only 9%, and both 5%). Restenosis at the parent vessel occurred less frequently in the debulking group than in the nondebulking group (5% vs 33%, respectively, p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, the debulking procedure was an independent predictive factor of restenosis for the parent vessel (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence intervals 0.01 to 0.91, p = 0.04). Clinical follow-up was obtained in all patients at 19.9 +/- 13.7 months. There were 2 deaths (noncardiac origin), but no myocardial infarction during follow-up. Target lesion revascularization was required in 6 patients. The event-free survival rate (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization) was 86% at the end of the follow-up period. In conclusion, stenting for an unprotected LMCA bifurcation lesion may be performed with a high procedural success rate and a favorable clinical outcome in selected patients with normal left ventricular function, suggesting that stenting would be an effective alternative to surgery in these patients.     

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained. METHODS: Elective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years. RESULTS: Compared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.     

Unprotected left main stenting,short- and long-term outcomes

Abstract

Background: Coronary bypass surgery is recommended for the treatment of left main coronary stenosis. Recently a percutaneous approach has been described as a feasible option. Objectives: To present the in-hospital and long-term clinical and angiographic outcome of a consecutive group of patients undergoing stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease, and to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) versus metal stent (BMS). Methods: 238 consecutive patients underwent unprotected LMCA stenting. 165 received BMS and 73 received DES. Most patients (88.7%) presented with acute coronary syndrome. Clinical (100%) and angiographic (84%) follow-up was obtained. Results: Patients’ presentation: STEMI (7.2%), non-STEMI (13.5%), unstable angina (67.6%), stable angina (11.7%). Procedural success rate was 100%. In-hospital mortality was 2.1%, all in patients presented with unstable hemodynamic conditions. None of the patients needed emergent CABG. In the long-term follow-up (average three years) there were 12 deaths (5%), 3 patients required CABG and 25 patients required TVR. The overall angiographic LM restenosis rate show a trend toward lower rate in the DES group than the BMS group (9.6% versus 13.8%, P = 0.08). There was no difference in one year mortality (4.1% versus 4.2%) and AMI (2.7% versus 2.8%) between DES and BMS. Conclusions: Stenting for LM stenosis can be performed safely with acceptable in hospital and long-term outcome. Reconsideration of current guidelines should be considered. Drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and long-term complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.     

Comparison of simple and complex stenting techniques in the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation stenosis

We assessed the safety and feasibility of various stenting techniques using the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation stenoses. One hundred sixteen patients with unprotected LMCA bifurcation stenoses underwent SES implantation. A simple stenting technique (simple group, n = 67) across the left circumflex artery (LCx) and a complex technique (complex group) comprising "kissing" stenting (n = 24) or a "crush" (n = 25) technique were used. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar for the 2 groups, except for more multivessel involvement and narrower LCxs in the complex group. The procedural success rate was 100%. Angiographic restenosis rate at 6 months was lower in the simple group (5.3%) than in the complex group (24.4%, p = 0.024). In the complex group, restenosis rates were similar for the kissing (25.0%) and crush (23.8%) techniques (p = 1.0). There were no incidents of death or myocardial infarction during follow-up (median 18.6 months). Target lesion revascularization was performed in 6 patients only in the complex group (0% vs 12.2%, p = 0.005). At 18 months, survival rates without target lesion revascularization were 100 +/- 0% in the simple group and 85.7 +/- 5.6% in the complex group (p = 0.004). In conclusion, SES implantation for unprotected LMCA bifurcation stenoses appears to be safe and effective. Compared with the complex stenting technique, the simple technique was technically easier and appeared to be more effective in improving long-term outcomes in patients with normal LCxs.     

One-year clinical outcomes of protected and unprotected left main coronary artery stenting.

AIMS: To evaluate outcomes for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenting and compare results between protected (left coronary grafted) and unprotected LMCA stenting in the current bare-metal stent era. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes among 142 consecutive patients who underwent protected or unprotected LMCA stenting since 1997. All-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and the combined major adverse clinical event (MACE) rates at one year were computed. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients (70%) underwent protected and 43 patients (30%) underwent unprotected LMCA stenting. In the unprotected group, 86% were considered poor surgical candidates. Survival at one year was 88% for all patients, TLR 20%, and MACE 32%. At one year, survival was reduced in the unprotected group (72% vs. 95%, P<0.001) and MACE was increased in the unprotected patients (49% vs. 25%, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In the current era, stenting for both protected and unprotected LMCA disease is still associated with high long-term mortality and MACE rates. Stenting for unprotected LMCA disease in a high-risk population should only be considered in the absence of other revascularization options. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of stenting for unprotected LMCA disease.     

Intravascular ultrasonic predictors of angiographic restenosis after long coronary stenting

The intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) criteria for stent optimization have not been determined in stenting long lesions. We evaluated the predictors of angiographic restenosis and compared it with stent lumen cross-sectional area (CSA) and stent length between short (stent length <20 mm) and long (> or =20 mm) coronary stenting. IVUS-guided coronary stenting was successfully performed in 285 consecutive patients with 304 native coronary lesions. Six-month follow-up angiogram was performed in 236 patients (82.8%) with 246 lesions (80.9%). Results were evaluated using conventional (clinical, angiographic, and IVUS) methods. The overall angiographic restenosis rate was 22.8% (56 of 246 lesions) (short stent 17.6% vs. long stent 32.2%, p = 0.009). Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of angiographic restenosis were the IVUS stent lumen CSA (odds ratio 1.51, 95% confidence intervals 1.18 to 1.92, p = 0.001) and stent length (odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence intervals 0.91 to 1.00, p = 0.039). The angiographic restenosis rate was 54.8% for stent lumen CSA of <5.0 mm2 (short stent 37.5% vs. long stent 73.3%, p = 0.049), 27.4% for CSA between 5.0 and 7.0 mm2 (short stent 24.1% vs. long stent 31.7%, p = 0.409), 10.5% for CSA between 7.0 and 9.0 mm2 (short stent 10.0% vs. long stent 12.5%, p = 0.772), and 11.4% for stent lumen CSA of > or =9.0 mm2 (short stent 10.4% vs. long stent 13.3%, p = 0.767) (p = 0.001). Compared with short coronary stenting, long coronary stenting is effective treatment modality to cover long lesions with comparable long-term clinical outcomes in cases of stent lumen CSA of > or =7.0 mm2. Regardless of the stent length, the most important factor determining angiographic restenosis was the IVUS stent lumen CSA in relatively large coronary artery lesions.     

Six-month angiographic follow-up after intravascular ultrasound-guided stenting of infarct-related artery: comparison with non-infarct-related artery

BACKGROUND: Compared with balloon angioplasty, stenting has been established as an effective treatment modality to reduce restenosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction. However, the immediate results that predict favorable long-term outcomes in the acute infarct stenting are unknown. Therefore, we evaluated long-term outcomes of stenting for infarct-related artery (IRA) lesions by using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) compared with that of stenting for non-IRA lesions. METHODS: IVUS-guided coronary stenting was successfully performed in 510 native coronary lesions (105 IRA vs 405 non-IRA). A 6-month follow-up angiogram was performed in 419 (82.2%) lesions: 87 (82.9%) IRA lesions and 332 (82.0%) non-IRA lesions. Coronary stenting on the IRA lesions was successfully performed within 7 to 10 days after onset of infarction in 42 patients and within 12 hours in 45 patients. Results were evaluated by clinical, angiographic, and IVUS methods. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in clinical and angiographic variables between the two groups. IVUS variables including reference vessel area and minimal stent area were also similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in angiographic restenosis rate between the two groups in cases of minimal stent area > or = 7 mm(2): 12.8% (6 of 47) in IRA versus 19.1% (33 of 173) in non-IRA lesions (P = .315). However, the angiographic restenosis rate in cases of minimal stent area <7 mm(2) was 50% (20 of 40) in IRA lesions versus 31.5% (50 of 159) in non-IRA lesions (P = .028). CONCLUSIONS: Angiographic restenosis is significantly higher in stenting for IRA lesions compared with that for non-IRA lesions in cases of minimal stent area < 7 mm(2).     

Randomized comparison of debulking followed by stenting versus stenting alone for ostial left anterior descending artery stenosis: intravascular ultrasound guidance

Background

Although directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) before stenting has the advantage of combining substantial removal of atheromatous plaque and prevention of elastic recoil, there has been no randomized study to investigate its efficacy in ostial left anterior descending artery (LAD) lesions. This study was aimed to evaluate the effect of DCA followed by stenting on ostial LAD stenosis under the guidance of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).

Methods

Eighty-six patients with ostial LAD stenoses were randomly assigned to DCA followed by stenting (group I) or stenting alone (group II). Aggressive DCA or optimal stenting was performed in both groups under the guidance of IVUS. The primary end point was angiographic restenosis at 6 months.

Results

Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The postprocedural minimal lumen diameter was larger in group I than group II (4.0 ± 0.4 mm vs. 3.5 ± 0.5 mm, P < .001). However, the angiographic restenosis rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups (9/32 [28.1%] in group I vs. 11/30 [36.7%] in group II, P = .472). The postprocedural IVUS stent area was the only independent determinant of restenosis by multivariate analysis (odds ratio .61, 95% CI 0.41-0.92, P = .018).

Conclusions

DCA followed by stenting achieved greater lumen gain than stenting alone for ostial LAD stenosis. However, DCA did not improve angiographic restenosis.     

Long-term (three-year) outcomes after stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in patients with normal left ventricular function

The purpose of this study was to analyze long-term follow-up information from patients treated with stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. Stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis is often performed in selected patients, but the long-term safety of this therapy is not yet established. Between January 1995 and September 2000, 270 consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis and normal left ventricular function who underwent treatment at 4 clinical centers were included in this study. Data were forwarded to the coordinating center using a standard case report form. The procedural success rate was 98.9%. There were no deaths, 3 stent thromboses, and 3 Q-wave myocardial infarctions during the hospitalization. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 237 patients (follow-up rate 87.8%), and the restenosis rate was 21.1%. The reference size was an independent predictor of binary restenosis (odds ratio 0.543, 95% confidence interval 0.308 to 0.957, p = 0.03). During the follow-up period (32.3 +/- 18.5 months), there were 20 deaths (8 cardiac, 12 noncardiac) and 5 nonfatal myocardial infarctions. Target and new lesion revascularizations were required in 45 (16.7%) and 31 (11.5%) patients, respectively. The cumulative probabilities free from major adverse cardiac events were 81.9 +/- 2.4%, 78.4 +/- 2.6%, and 77.7 +/- 2.7%, respectively, at 1, 2, and 3 years. Combined coronary artery disease and postprocedural minimal luminal diameter were the significant predictors of major adverse cardiac events. Thus, the long-term prognosis of patients after stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis was favorable in selected patients with normal left ventricular function.     

Intravascular ultrasound predictors of target lesion revascularization after stenting of protected left main coronary artery stenoses

We evaluated the predictors of late clinical outcomes after stenting of protected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenoses. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stenting of protected LMCA stenoses was performed in 87 consecutive patients between January 1994 and December 1996. Results were evaluated using conventional (clinical, angiographic, and IVUS) methodology. Late (12 month) clinical follow-up information was obtained in all patients. Initial procedural success was achieved in 86 patients (99%). There was 1 in-hospital death (in the 1 patient with a procedural failure). There were no other in-hospital complications, including Q-wave myocardial infarction, emergency bypass surgery, or repeat coronary angioplasty. The overall target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate was 13%. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, the only independent predictor of TLR was the postintervention lumen area by IVUS. A final lumen area > or =7.0 mm2 was obtained in 74 patients (86%); the TLR rate for these patients was 7%. This was compared with patients with a final lumen area <7.0 mm2 in whom the TLR rate was 50% (p = 0.0011). Stenting of protected LMCA stenoses is safe and effective with acceptable long-term clinical outcomes. The most important factor determining long-term success was the postintervention lumen area by IVUS.     

Bail-out stenting for left main coronary artery dissection during catheter-based procedure: acute and long-term results

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment of patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) dissection during catheter-based procedure remains uncertain. HYPOTHESIS: In cases with significant LMCA dissection occurring during catheter-based procedure, prompt stent implantation may be safe and associated with favorable clinical outcome. METHODS: We evaluated the acute and long-term results of bail-out stenting for LMCA dissection occurring during a catheter-based procedure in 10 patients. RESULTS: Initially, there was no significant stenosis of LMCA segments in these patients. Catheter-induced dissection occurred in eight patients (during diagnostic angiography in three patients and during guiding catheter manipulation in five patients). Two patients suffered dissection in the setting of stent deployment in other vessels. Therefore, bail-out stenting for LMCA dissection was performed in a total of 10 patients. In four patients, hypotension developed and an intra-aortic balloon pump was placed during the procedure. Stents were successfully deployed in all patients; there was no in-hospital mortality. Six-month angiographic follow-up was performed in eight patients. No angiographic restenosis (diameter stenosis > or = 50%) was observed in any patient at follow-up study. During a mean follow-up of 31 +/- 25 months after hospital discharge, there was no major adverse cardiac event (death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization). CONCLUSIONS: Bail-out LMCA stenting is technically feasible and showed good acute and long-term results in a small series of patients.     

Unprotected left main coronary artery stenting: immediate and medium-term outcomes of 140 elective procedures

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate immediate and late outcomes after stenting for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: Conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), for which coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the gold standard therapy for years, has yielded poor results in unprotected LMCA lesions. The development of coronary stents, together with their dramatic patency improvement provided by new antiplatelet regimens and their validation against restenosis, warrants a reappraisal of angioplasty in LMCA stenosis. METHODS: From January 1993 to September 1998, 140 consecutive unselected patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis underwent elective stenting. Group I included 47 high-CABG-risk patients, and group II included 93 low-CABG-risk patients. Ticlopidine without aspirin was routinely started at least 72 h before the procedure and continued for one month. Patients were reevaluated monthly. A follow-up angiography was requested after six months. RESULTS: The procedure success rate was 100%. One-month mortality was 9% (4/47) in group I and 0% in group II. A follow-up angiography was obtained in 82% of cases, and target lesion revascularization was required in 17.4%. One-year actuarial survival was 89% in the first 29 group I patients and 97.5% in the first 63 group II patients. CONCLUSIONS: Stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis provided excellent immediate results, particularly in good CABG candidates. Medium-term results were good, with a restenosis rate of 23%, similar to that seen after stenting at other coronary sites. Stenting deserves to be considered a safe and effective alternative to CABG in institutions performing large numbers of PTCAs.     

Coronary stenting after rotational atherectomy in diffuse lesions of the small coronary artery: comparison with balloon angioplasty before stenting

The purpose of this randomized trial was to evaluate the role of debulking and balloon predilation on acute and long-term results of stent implantation in diffuse stenosis of small vessels. Patients with symptomatic diffuse stenosis of the native left anterior descending coronary artery between 2 and 2.9 mm in size were randomly assigned to rotational atherectomy (group I, n = 21) or balloon dilation (group II, n = 20) before stenting. The primary end point of the study was the incidence of angiographic restenosis at follow-up; adverse clinical events, such as death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or target vessel revascularization, were assessed as secondary end points. Acute gain was significantly greater in group I than in group II (p = 0.038), but net gain at follow-up was similar in both groups (p = 0.24). There was no significant difference in angiographic restenosis rate (33.3% vs 31.3%, p = 0.80), target vessel revascularization (23.8% vs 15%, p = 0.21) or 1-year event-free survival rate (72.8% vs 84.6%, p = 0.28). In conclusion, rotational atherectomy before stenting showed no additional benefit over balloon dilation with stenting in the management of diffuse lesions in small coronary vessels.     

Serial angiographic follow-up of sirolimus-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to evaluate the clinical and serial angiographic outcomes of patients undergoing sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: The efficacy of SES has led to their expanded use for off-label indications, including LMCA disease. METHODS: Unprotected LMCA intervention with SES was attempted in 50 patients. Surveillance angiography was performed at three and nine months' follow-up. RESULTS: The target lesion involved the distal LMCA in 47 patients (94%). In-lesion restenosis occurred in 21 patients (42%), was focal in 85% of cases, and in 82% involved the branch ostia, sparing the LMCA itself. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) occurred in 19 patients (38%) over a mean follow-up of 276 +/- 57 days; TLR was ischemia-driven in 7 patients (14%). Late loss was significantly greater within the left circumflex (LCX) ostium compared to the parent vessel (PV) of the LMCA bifurcation (0.83 +/- 0.89 mm vs. 0.49 +/- 0.72 mm, p = 0.04). Late loss continued to increase between three- and nine-month follow-up. Final minimal luminal diameter and maximal balloon pressure were independent predictors of restenosis of the PV. CONCLUSIONS: Restenosis is a frequent finding when serial angiographic follow-up is performed after SES implantation for unprotected distal LMCA lesions. Restenosis is usually focal, most often involves the LCX ostium, and often occurs without symptoms.     

Comparison of directional coronary atherectomy and stenting versus stenting alone for the treatment of de novo and restenotic coronary artery narrowing

Late lumen loss after directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) is mainly determined by arterial remodeling. We hypothesized that stent implantation after optimal lesion debulking could be an effective approach to reduce restenosis. A total of 753 patients with de novo or restenotic coronary lesions were prospectively randomized to DCA plus stenting (n = 381) or stenting alone (n = 372). The patients were followed for 12 months. Procedural success was achieved in 91.5% versus 97.3% (p = 0.0007) of patients treated with DCA plus stent versus stent alone. Optimal atherectomy (<20% residual stenosis) was achieved in 26.5% of patients. The final minimal luminal diameter and the acute gain were similar in the 2 groups. There was no increase in 30-day major adverse cardiac events in the DCA plus stent group (3.9% vs 2.4%, p = 0.30). The primary end point, angiographic restenosis at 8 months, occurred in 26.7% of patients treated with DCA plus stents and in 22.1% of patients treated with stents alone (p = 0.237). Clinical follow-up to 1 year showed no difference in mortality (1.3% vs 0.8%, p = 0.725), acute myocardial infarction (4.2% vs 3.5%, p = 0.706), and target vessel failure (composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) (23.9% vs 21.5%, p = 0.487) between patients with DCA plus stents and those with stents alone. This study failed to support the hypothesis that DCA before stenting lowers the angiographic restenosis rate compared with stents alone. At 12-month follow-up, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in rates of death, reinfarction, or target vessel failure.     

Clinical and angiographic follow-up after long versus short stenting in unselected chronic coronary occlusions

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on the efficacy of long stenting for lesions in unselected chronic total occlusion (CTO). HYPOTHESIS: The study was undertaken to evaluate the angiographic restenosis and long-term clinical outcomes after long stent implantation in patients with CTO. METHODS: Our retrospective analysis includes a consecutive series of stent implantation in 220 patients with CTO. We compared angiographic restenosis, target lesion revascularization, and long-term clinical outcomes of short stenting (< 20 mm, Group 1, n = 113) with a concurrent series of long stenting (> or = 20 mm, Group 2, n = 107). RESULTS: Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 174 patients (79.5% of those eligible), and the rates of angiographic restenosis were 19.3% in Group 1 and 33.7% in Group 2 (p < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, the postinterventional minimal lumen diameter was the only independent predictor of restenosis (odds ratio = 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.49, p < 0.01). The angiographic restenosis rate was significantly lower in Group 1 than in Group 2 in patients with final minimal lumen diameter < 3.0 mm (28.9 vs. 55.9%, respectively, p < 0.05). However, the angiographic restenosis rate was not significantly different between the two groups in patients with final minimal lumen diameter > or = 3 mm (12.0 vs. 19.2%, respectively, p = NS). During the follow-up (29.1 +/- 10.8 months), there was no difference between the two groups in death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: The use of long (> or = 20 mm) versus short (< 20 mm) stents in patients with CTO is associated with a higher angiographic restenosis rate, but there is an equivalent risk of restenosis in selected patients with relatively large-sized vessels.     

Sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis

We performed this study in order to compare the immediate and mid-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in lesions of the unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA). We assessed 54 patients from 5 centers who had undergone unprotected LMCA stenting (35 SES and 19 PES). The procedural success rates were 100 and 95%, respectively, in the SES and PES patients (p = 0.19). At the 6-month clinical follow-up, the event-free probability was 100% in the SES group, and 88% in the PES group (p = 0.07). At the 6-month angiographic follow-up (n = 24), the SES group exhibited a slightly lower late loss than did the PES group (0.24 +/- 0.44 vs. 0.65 +/- 0.60 mm, p = 0.09), and the restenosis rates were 8 and 9% (p = 0.94) in the SES and PES patients, respectively. In conclusion, both groups exhibited excellent in-hospital and 6-month outcomes with no significant differences between them.     

Relation between residual plaque burden after stenting and six-month angiographic restenosis

The degree of residual plaque burden outside of a stent might be correlated with the degree of intimal hyperplasia. However, the relation between residual plaque burden and angiographic restenosis are still unknown in a large number of patients. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of residual plaque burden after stenting on 6-month angiographic restenosis. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided coronary stenting was successfully performed in 723 patients with 785 native coronary lesions. Six-month follow-up angiograms and evaluation of residual plaque burden by IVUS were available in 566 patients (78.3%) with 622 lesions (79.2%). Results were evaluated using conventional methods. The overall angiographic restenosis rate was 23.0% (143 of 622 lesions). There was no significant difference in residual plaque burden between the lesions with and without restenosis (52% vs 51%, respectively, p = 0.148). The angiographic restenosis rate was 20.8% (11 of 53 lesions), 21.6% (51 of 236 lesions), 22.0% (55 of 250 lesions), and 31.3% (26 of 83 lesions) in the lesions with residual plaque burden < 40%, between 40% and 50%, between 50% and 60%, and > 60%, respectively (p = 0.284). Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, the only independent predictor of angiographic restenosis was the IVUS stent area (odds ratio 0.807, 95% confidence intervals 0.69 to 0.95, p = 0.011). Furthermore, even in the lesions with residual plaque burden > 60%, the restenosis rate was 37.3% (23 of 61 lesions) versus 13.6% (3 of 22 lesions ) in IVUS stent areas of < 7 and > or =7 mm(2), respectively (p = 0.031). In conclusion, residual plaque burden outside the stent might not predict angiographic restenosis. IVUS stent area was the only independent predictor of angiographic restenosis.     

Long-term outcome of simultaneous kissing stenting technique with sirolimus-eluting stent for large bifurcation coronary lesions.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to evaluate the outcomes of simultaneous kissing stenting with sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous intervention for bifurcation coronary lesions is still challenging. METHODS: This study was designed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of 36 consecutive patients with large bifurcation coronary lesions who underwent simultaneous kissing stenting with SES. RESULTS: Lesion location was unprotected left main in 29 patients (81%) and anterior descending artery in 7 (19%). The patients received a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel for 6 months and cilostazol for 1 month. Mean proximal reference diameter was 4.05 +/- 0.68 mm. Compared with the side branch (SB), the main vessel (MV) involved longer lesions (25.8 +/- 17.0 mm vs. 10.2 +/- 10.8 mm, P < 0.001) and smaller preprocedural minimal lumen diameters (1.02 +/- 0.53 mm vs. 1.46 +/- 0.78 mm, P = 0.006) and was treated with larger stents (3.1 +/- 0.3 mm vs. 3.0 +/- 0.3 mm, P = 0.006). Angiographic success rate was 100%. Over the follow-up of 26.7 +/- 8.6 months, no deaths, myocardial infarctions or stent thromboses occurred. Target lesion revascularization was performed in five patients (14%). Overall angiographic restenosis occurred in 5/30 patients (17%), consisting of 4 (13%) at MV and 3 (10%) at SB. At follow-up angiography, a membranous diaphragm at the carina was identified in 14 patients (47%), but only one of whom was associated with angiographic restenosis. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous kissing stenting with SES appears a feasible stenting technique in large bifurcation coronary lesions. However, a new angiographic structure of carinal membrane developed in a half of patients at follow-up and its influence needs to be further investigated.     

糖尿病患者冠状动脉内支架术后的远期疗效

目的　探讨糖尿病患者选择性冠状动脉 (冠脉 )内支架术的远期疗效。方法　 80 8例冠心病患者行选择性冠脉内支架术 ,其中糖尿病组 174例 ,非糖尿病组 6 34例。随访两组患者远期结果。结果　两组支架术成功率 (96 0 %和 96 1% )相似。平均随访 (19± 7 8)个月 (6～ 4 2个月 ) ,临床随访率为 95 3%。随访期内 ,与非糖尿病组相比 ,糖尿病组心功能改善者 (5 2 2 %比 6 1 0 % )较少 ,再住院率 (4 2 7%比 32 5 % )增加 ;且心脏事件 (30 6 %比 2 2 2 % )、再狭窄 (19 1%比 12 5 % )及总死亡(10 2 %比 4 6 % )均显著增加。多因素分析显示 ,糖尿病为死亡 (OR =2 2 0 ,95 %CI 1 12～ 4 33,P =0 0 2 2 )和再狭窄 (OR =1 6 6 ,95 %CI 1 0 4～ 2 6 7,P =0 0 35 )的独立预测因素。结论　糖尿病患者选择性冠脉内支架术远期结果可以接受 ,但糖尿病仍是远期不良预后的独立预测因素。