Percutaneous intervention for in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation

目的 评价药物洗脱支架(DES)内再狭窄患者中根据再狭窄模式选择介入治疗的远期预后.方法 选择2006年6月-2009年12月因DES内再狭窄于上海交通大学附属胸科医院行再次介入治疗的冠状动脉性心脏病患者,根据再狭窄部位及类型选择介入治疗方案.对于累及DES节段的再狭窄者行再次植入DES术;对于狭窄部位局限于DES内的I型病变者行高压球囊扩张术;对于狭窄部位局限于DES内的Ⅱ～Ⅳ型病变者先行球囊扩张,再根据扩张后的结果由术者决定是否再次植入DES.所有患者均前瞻性随访主要心血管不良事件( MACE),包括死亡、靶病变重建(TLR)和心肌梗死(MI).结果 共88例行介入治疗,其中42例行单纯球囊血管成形(POBA)术(POBA组),46例行再次植入DES( DES组).两组间各靶病变部位及各种原植入DES的涂层药物类型构成比的差异均无统计学意义(P值均＞0.05),两组间再狭窄病变部位及类型构成比的差异均有统计学意义(P值均＜0.05).POBA组、DES组的支架内再狭窄(ISR)的发生率分别为(72.5±11.9)％、(76.2±9.1)％,两组间的差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).平均随访时间为(2.2±1.0)年,两组间MACE、TLR、MI的发生率及病死率的差异均无统计学意义(P值均＞0.05).结论 根据DES内再狭窄部位及类型选择介入治疗方案是有效的.对于局灶型ISR可行POBA术,而对于非局灶型或节段内ISR病变则需要再次植入DES.     

药物涂层球囊治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄和小血管病变的临床疗效

目的 观察药物涂层球囊(DCB)治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄(ISR)和小血管病变的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析2018年1月至2019年10月入住我院行DCB治疗的冠心病患者48例,其中ISR 22例,小血管病变26例。另选取性别、病变血管及类型相同,年龄、合并基础疾病等相近的行药物涂层支架(DES)治疗的患者48例作为对照组。以心源性死亡、非致死性急性心肌梗死(AMI)、靶病变再次血运重建(TLR)等不良心血管事件(MACE)为主要终点观察指标,记录复查冠脉造影或冠脉CT结果。结果 平均随访(9.15±5.46)个月。DES组MACE发生率为8.34%,高于DCB组的4.17%,但差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组均未发生心源性死亡病例,DCB组中无非致死性AMI,DES组发生1例(2.08%),组间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);DCB组行TLR 2例(4.17%),低于DES组4例(8.34%),但差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。DCB组在(9.24±4.02)个月有19例患者复查冠脉造影和4例复查冠脉CT,ISR患者10例(1例血管狭窄85%),小血管病变13例(1例血管狭窄90%);DES组在(8.34±5.28)个月有14例复查冠脉造影,ISR患者6例(1例血管狭窄80%),小血管病变8例(1例血管狭窄99%的非致死性AMI,2例血管狭窄75%和80%)。生存曲线分析显示,两组在随访过程中无MACE生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.406)。结论 药物涂层球囊治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄和小血管病变的疗效不劣于药物涂层支架,可作为临床冠脉血运重建的重要策略。     

药物洗脱支架内再狭窄再次置人支架的远期疗效和安全性

目的探讨对药物洗脱支架(DES)置入后发生再狭窄(ISR)患者再次实施DES置入术的远期疗效和安全性。方法选择植入DES的冠心病患者,经冠状动脉造影检查证实发生再狭窄(ISR≥50%),并且再次置入DES治疗ISR介入手术成功的患者。985例DES-ISR患者根据狭窄类型分为局限性狭窄组130例(13.2%),弥漫性狭窄组699例(71.0%),闭塞性狭窄组156例(15.8%)。随访观察3组患者的远期(6个月、12个月)疗效及安全性。结果经过6个月的随访,局限性狭窄组患者主要不良心血管事件(MACE)的发生率为3.85%(5/130);弥漫性狭窄组患者MACE的发生率为2.72%(19/699);闭塞狭窄组患者MACE的发生率为3.21%(5/156),3组6个月的随访结果差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。经过12个月的随访,局限性狭窄组患者MACE的发生率为13.08%(17/130);弥漫性狭窄组患者MACE的发生率为9.16%(64/699);闭塞狭窄组患者MACE的发生率为9.62%(15/156),3组12个月的随访结果差异亦无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论目前对于DES-ISR患者来说,不论ISR的类型,再次置入DES都是一种有效的方法。     

冠状动脉植入金属裸支架适应证的研究

背景　目前国内植入金属裸支架（BMS）的比例不足5%,远低于美国和欧洲国家的30%~40%。其原因是对植入BMS适应证研究报道较少,BMS的认识还停留在初级阶段。BMS的适应证、效果和安全性受到质疑。目的　探讨急性冠脉综合征（ACS）患者植入BMS的适应证、长期效果和安全性。方法　选取2001—2010年在北华大学附属医院心脏中心住院植入BMS和药物洗脱支架（DES）随访资料完整的ACS患者1 203例为研究对象,其中BMS组491例和DES组712例。患者均住院行冠状动脉造影（CAG）或门诊行CT血管造影（CTA）随访,随访时间为12~175个月,平均随访（71.4±36.4）个月。比较两组不同病变类型（A、B1、B2、C型病变）患者随访终点事件及再狭窄发生率的差异。结果　BMS组与DES组患者心力衰竭、靶血管重建（TVR）、冠状动脉旁路移植术（CABG）发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;BMS组患者全因死亡、总主要不良心血管事件（MACE）、靶病变血管重建（TLR）发生率高于DES组,再发非致命性心肌梗死、支架内血栓形成（ST）发生率低于DES组（P<0.05）。两组A型病变患者全因死亡、总MACE、再发非致命性心肌梗死、心力衰竭、TLR、TVR、ST发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。BMS组B1型、B2型、C型病变患者全因死亡、总MACE、TLR发生率高于DES组（P<0.05）。两组A型、B1型病变患者支架内再狭窄、节段内再狭窄、支架内再狭窄和/或节段内再狭窄发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。两组B2型、C型病变患者节段内再狭窄发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;BMS组B2型、C型病变患者支架内再狭窄、支架内再狭窄和/或节段内再狭窄发生率高于DES组（P<0.05）。结论　A型病变ACS患者植入BMS长期全因死亡、总MACE、TLR发生率和再狭窄发生率与DES无差异,远期效果好,安全性高,故可把A型病变ACS作为植入BMS的适应证。     

药物涂层球囊临床应用新进展

冠状动脉介入治疗是目前冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病(冠心病)治疗的主要手段,药物涂层支架(DES)的应用大大提高了冠心病患者的治疗效果和预后。然而,支架植入也带来了些许弊端,如支架内血栓形成和支架内再狭窄(ISR),支架晚期贴壁不良及血管内皮愈合延迟等问题[1]。因此,具有“介入无植入”这一新概念和新技术的药物涂层球囊(DCB)随之产生。DCB是普通球囊形成技术与药物洗脱技术的结合,它将抑制细胞增殖的药物附着在球囊表面,在扩张过程中将球囊上的药物运输到局部病变血管壁,以起到抑制平滑肌细胞增殖、防止血管再狭窄的作用。与DES相比,具有双抗时间短、出血风险率低和无体内异物残留等优势。     

药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄的临床观察

目的观察药物洗脱支架治疗冠脉支架内再狭窄的临床疗效。方法对入选的患者行药物洗脱支架治疗,术后观察心脏不良反应事件的发生情况。结果 44例患者中发生不良反应事件22例,其中胸痛复发19例,TVR7例,ISR处原支架的类型是影响术后疗效的重要因素,本研究认为DES术后ISR的疗效好于BMS术后ISR(P=0.002)。而患者的年龄、性别、病变血管的直径和病变部位、病变的严重程度以及DES涂层材料的不同与治疗效果无明显的相关性。结论药物洗脱支架是治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄的有效手段。     

药物支架和切割球囊在药物洗脱支架植入术后再狭窄中治疗效果比较

目的比较药物支架再植入和切割球囊2种方法,在药物洗脱支架植入术后再狭窄病人中的治疗效果。方法回顾分析124例药物洗脱支架内再狭窄病人,经切割球囊或药物支架再次植入治疗即刻和术后随访结果。并于治疗时及术后(6.0±1.4)个月行冠脉造影检查。结果 2组病人的年龄、性别、既往病史及介入治疗前支架内再狭窄情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。介入治疗即刻切割球囊组与药物支架组:最小管腔直径[(2.54±0.45)mm vs(2.67±0.48)mm]及直径狭窄率(23.5%±10.3%vs 21.8%±9.4%)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后6个月药物支架组的最小管腔直径(1.86±0.63)mm明显高于切割球囊组(1.34±0.71)mm(P<0.01),且直径狭窄率显著低于切割球囊组(39.2%vs 47.8%,P<0.05)。药物支架组复发再狭窄和晚期管腔丢失量均低于切割球囊组[4.1%vs 9.8%,(0.52±0.48)mm vs(0.74±0.53)mm],差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论药物支架再植入相比于切割球囊治疗药物洗脱支架术后再狭窄,6个月后支架内再狭窄率低于切割球囊组。     

2009年冠心病介入治疗新进展

1新器械创新,科学发展的原动力 支架内晚期血栓形成问题使人们对药物洗脱支架（DES）的安全性产生质疑,药物洗脱球囊（DEB）的问世,是球囊设计理念上的一个新突破。PEPCADⅡ—ISR（紫杉醇药物洗脱球囊减少支架内再狭窄）试验随访发现,DEB组晚期管腔丢失、再狭窄、靶血管血运重建及不良心脏事件（MACE）发生率均显著低于DES组。     

普通球囊与切割球囊预扩张治疗前降支开口病变51例临床分析

目的:比较普通球囊与切割球囊预扩张治疗前降支开口病变的疗效及安全性。方法:对51例符合入选条件的患者随机分为CBA组(22例)和POBA组(29例),2组间临床资料无显著性差异;CBA组用切割球囊预扩张,POBA组应用普通球囊预扩张,对其进行分析,并短期随访。结果:2组手术成功率均达到100%。2组间均无冠状动脉穿孔、心包填塞发生;无急性血栓事件发生。支架术前、术后2组MLD无显著差异。但CBA组球囊扩张峰压显著低于POBA组(P=0.001),随访造影的MLD在CBA组明显大于POBA组(P<0.05);支架内再狭窄CBA组为4.55%(1/22),POBA组6.90%(2/29),CBA组的再狭窄率较POBA组低(P<0.05)。随访期间无死亡、冠状动脉旁路移植术、Q波心肌梗死及急诊介入病例。结论:前降支开口病变支架置入前使用CBA预扩张较POBA预扩张能够减少再狭窄发生,同时使用切割球囊预扩张安全有效。     

药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄的临床观察

目的观察药物洗脱支架治疗冠脉支架内再狭窄的临床疗效。方法对入选的患者行药物洗脱支架治疗,术后观察心脏不良反应事件的发生情况。结果 44例患者中发生不良反应事件22例,其中胸痛复发19例,TVR7例,ISR处原支架的类型是影响术后疗效的重要因素,本研究认为DES术后ISR的疗效好于BMS术后ISR（P=0.002）。而患者的年龄、性别、病变血管的直径和病变部位、病变的严重程度以及DES涂层材料的不同与治疗效果无明显的相关性。结论药物洗脱支架是治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄的有效手段。     

A comparison of clinical and angiographic outcomes after Excel bioabsorbable polymer versus Firebird durable polymer rapamycin-eluting stent for the treatment of coronary artery disease in a “real world” setting: six-month follow-up results

Background Several clinical trials have shown that rapamycin-eluting stents significantly reduce the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The Firebird stent and the Excel stent (coated with bioabsorbable polymer) are two different types of rapamycin-eluting stents made in China, both have been recently approved for clinical use in China by State Food and Drug Administration. However, it is unclear whether there are differences in safety and efficacy between the two types of stents in daily practice. Methods In the month of June 2006, a total of 190 consecutive patients were treated exclusively with Firebird stents (n=93, Firebird group) or Excel stents (n=97, Excel group) in our center and were included in this study. The frequency of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization), binary restenosis, and late lumen loss and stent thrombosis during a six-month follow-up period were compared between the two groups.Results Patient and lesion characteristics were comparable between the groups. Major adverse cardiac event rates were low in hospital and at 6 months (2.1% in the Excel group and 0% in the Firebird group, P﹥0.05). The 6-month angiographic in-stent restenosis rate was 0% in both groups, with an associated late loss of (0.15 ± 0.21) mm versus (0.14 ± 0.20) mm (P=0.858) and the in-segment restenosis rate was also 0% for the Excel group and the Firebird group. There was no definite stent thrombosis identified in either group during the six-month follow-up period and only one patient in the Excel group had probable stent thrombosis in hospital. Conclusions Results from this mid-term, single-center study showed that both of the Firebird and the Excel rapamycin eluting stent had similar effects on reducing the incidence of MACE and the risk of restenosis (both in-stent and in-segment binary restenosis) after PCI in daily practice.     

垠艺支架与Firebird支架治疗冠心病合并糖尿病患者疗效比较

目的:探讨药物涂层支架在冠心病合并糖尿病患者介入治疗中的临床疗效。方法:并发糖尿病的冠心病患者90例常规冠状动脉造影,进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,其中44例植入国产雷帕霉素药物涂层支架(Firebird组),46例植入国产紫杉醇药物涂层支架(垠艺组),术前术后常规使用阿司匹林和氯吡格雷,术后进行随访。结果:冠状动脉造影显示2支以上血管病变占83.3%,Firebird组植入雷帕霉素药物涂层支架77枚,垠艺组植入垠艺支架82枚,所有患者均获得成功。平均随访6.2±1.3个月,其中Firebird组复发心绞痛3例,1例发生心肌梗死。垠艺组复发心绞痛3例,1例发生心肌梗死。Firebird组发生再狭窄2例,垠艺组发生再狭窄2例。两组无支架内血栓形成和死亡。结论:垠艺支架对冠心病并发糖尿病患者的近期疗效与Firebird支架相似。     

冠状动脉弥漫性长病变的介入治疗

目的:评价冠心病患者应用长支架及多个支架序贯置入进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的临床疗效。方法:对164例冠心病患者的284支靶病变血管进行了PCI,其中194支(68.3%)为弥漫性长病变,平均靶病变狭窄93.8%±8.7%。A组59例:1支靶病变血管置入单个长支架20~36mm;B组105例:至少1支靶病变血管为多个支架相连接(2~5个)。结果:A、B二组长病变置入支架的平均总长度分别为23.1±10.1mm,28.8±10.5mm(P<0.05);A、B组的PCI手术成功率均为100%,恢复TIMI 3级血流分别为93.6%、96.1%,手术即刻残余狭窄率分别为1.7%、2.1%,住院期间心血管病事件(MACE)发生率分别为3.4%、2.9%,二组间上述各项数值统计学无显著差异(P>0.05)。平均随访11.8个月,A组随访58例,MACE发生率为8.6%,无事件生存率为93.1%(54/58);B组随访101例,MACE发生率为11.9%,无事件生存率为83.8%(88/105),二组间比较,统计学无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论:冠心病患者的弥漫性长病变,应用长支架或多个支架序贯置入进行PC I,临床疗效均较好。     

A single center investigation of bare-metal or drug-eluting stent restenosis from 1633 consecutive Chinese Han ethnic patients

Background Stents are widely used in China but the clinical impression is somehow that restenosis is less common because of the lower prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) and associated risk factors in Chinese populations. However, no large-sample published studies are available on angiographic stent restenosis including those of bare-metal stent (BMS) or drug-eluting stent (DES) in Chinese Han ethnic population.Mothods A total of 1633 consecutive patients with CAD who had undergone coronary stenting, quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) were retrospectively studied. At the time of stent implantation and at 7 months post-stenting 675 patients had a follow-up angiography. Statistical analysis was made with the chi-square test for categorical variables, unpaired t test for continuous variables, univariate or multivariate regression for baseline and angiographic characteristics and the Kaplan-Meier method for rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR).Results Stent restenosis was defined as ≥50% diameter stenosis in the dilated segment. A total of 675 patients with 1074 lesions were subjected to angiographic follow-up for 7 months on average. Of these lesions, 448 were implanted with BMS whereas 626 lesions with DES. At 7 months, bare-metal in-stent restenosis occured in 148 lesions (33.0%), and bare metal in-segment restenosis in 155 lesions (34.6%) in contrast to drug-eluting in-stent restenosis in 48 lesions (7.7%) and drug-eluting in-segment restenosis in 73 lesions (11.7%) (P&lt;0.001 compared with BMS respectively). Late loss in both in-stent and in segment was higher in BMS than in DES groups [(1.00±0.69) vs (0.28±0.52); (0.78±0.71) vs (0.21±0.52), P&lt;0.001 respectively]. Angulated lesion, lesion length, pre-procedural minimal luminal diameter (MLD), and BMS were independent predictors for TLR, (P&lt;0.01 respectively), whereas current smoker, ostial lesion, and stent overlapping, post-procedure in-stent MLD, lesion length, and stent types were independent predictors for in-segment restenosis (P&lt;0.01 respectively). Standard coronary risk factors such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and history of CAD were not associated with a higher rate of restenosis caused by BMS or DES implantation in our Chinese Han ethnic population.Conclusions Coronary stenting including BMS or DES implantation in Chinese Han ethnic patients is associated with a restenosis rate comparable to that demonstrated in previous studies from the western countries, and predictors of stent restenosis are somehow different from those in the western population.     

Is adjunctive balloon postdilatation necessary with drug-eluting stents? One center experience in Chinese patients

Background With the advent of drug-eluting stents （DES） and much lower rates of target vessel revascularization （TVR）, whether adjunctive balloon postdilatation can further optimize outcome is still unknown. The present study was to compare the outcomes of postdilatation with un-postdilatation following deployment of DES. Methods From April 2004 to September 2006, 6479 consecutive Chinese patients who underwent DES implantation, including 1769 with postdilatation （1454 male, （57.9 ± 10.8） years old） and 4710 without postdilatation （3819 male, （57.9 ± 10.6） years old） were analyzed. Clinical and angiographic follow-up was performed at 7 months. Results Compared with the un-postdilatation group, the postdilatation group had more complex lesions and larger relevant vessel diameter （RVD）. In the postdilatation group, in-stent residual restenosis was significantly improved right after the procedure （（16.80±5.88）% vs （19.60±6.07）%; P=0.000）. There was no statistical difference in the major adverse cardiac events （MACE） rate between the groups （2.9% vs 3.3%; P=0.420）, and there were also no statistical differences in death, acute myocardial infarction （AMI） and target lesion revascularization （TLR） rates in the two groups （0.1% vs 0.4%, P=0.127; 1.7% vs 1.3%, P=0.229; and 1.5% vs 2.0%, P=0.206, respectively）. The in-stent thrombosis rate was almost the same in both groups （0.5% vs 0.5%; P=1.000）. Seven months angiographic follow-up results showed that both in-stent and in-segment restenosis rates were lower in the postdilatation group （8.8% vs 15.6%, P=0.000; and 10.5% vs 17.3%, P=0.000）, and so were instent and in-segment late loss （（0.32±0.12） mm vs （0.49±0.13） mm, P=0.000; and （0.24±0.08） mm vs （0.36±0.09） mm, P=0.001 ）. Conclusion Postdilatation after DES deployment was safe and could reduce the restenosis rate, especially for more complex lesions.     

A comparison of angiographic and clinical outcomes after sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

Background In-stent restenosis （ISR） remains a challenge for interventional cardiologists. Some data suggest that drug-eluting stents （DES） represent a promising new option for the treatment of patients with ISR. Currently, 2 DES platforms are available [sirolimus-eluting stents （SES） and paclitaxel-eluting stents （PES） ], but the superiority of either approach for treating ISR has not been convincingly demonstrated. The aim of the present study was to retrospectively compare angiographic and clinical outcomes after treatment of ISR with SES or PES in a series of consecutive patients with ISR.     

Clinical outcome after management of unprotected left main in-stent restenosis after bare metal or drug-eluting stents

Background Implantation of either bare metal stent （BMS） or drug-eluting stent （DES） has been used in every day practice for patients with unprotected left main stenosis （UPLMS）. There are still a lack of data regading the subsequent results of UPLMS in-stent restenosis （ISR）. The present study aimed at determing the clinical outcome of UPLMS ISR patients after implantation of either BMS or DES.Methods Patients with UPLMS ISR after stenting were included. The primary endpoint was the cumulative major adverse cardiac events （MACE）, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction （Ml）, and target vessel revascularization （TVR）.Results UPLMS ISR rate was 14.8% （n=73, 15.7% after BMS, 14.5% for DES） after average of （3.89±2.01） years （range from 1 to 10.5 years） follow-up. Angiographic follow-up between 6-8 months was available in 85.3%. Of these,repeat percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） was used in 62 （84.9%） patients, with medicine only in 9 （12.4%） and coronary artery bypass graft （CABG） in 2 （2.7%）. Most repeat PCI patients were with unstable angina （87.0%）, and had decreased left ventricular ejection fraction （（42.58±5.12）%）, fewer focal/ostial left circumflex branch （LCX） lesions, in relative to medicine only group. After （31.9±23.3） months, the MACE, Ml, TVR and cardiac death were 31.5%, 1.4%, 24.1% and 8.2%, respectively. Definite and possible stent thrombosis occurred in 1 （1.4%） patient.Conclusions Medical therapy for asymptomatic isolated ostial LCX was safe. Repeat PCI for UPLMS ISR was associated with acceptable early and short-term clinical outcome. Further study was needed to elucidate the role of CABG in treating UPLMS ISR.     

Efficacy and safety of Firebird sirolimus-eluting stent in treatment of complex coronary lesions in Chinese patients: one-year clinical and eight-month angiographic outcomes from the FIREMAN registry

Background  Off-label application of drug-eluting stents (DES) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was not uncommon in daily practice, however DES in treating Chinese patients with complex lesion subset was under-investigated. The primary objective of the FIREMAN registry was to evaluate the long term efficacy and safety of the Firebird sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in treating patients with complex coronary lesions. Here we report the mid-term of one-year clinical outcomes and eight-month angiographic follow-up results of FIREMAN registry. 

Methods  The FIREMAN registry was a prospective multi-center registry, which included 1029 consecutive patients undergoing PCI with Firebird SES implantation between September 2006 and July 2007 in 45 centers in China. The clinical follow-up was designed to be performed at 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months post index procedure, and non-mandatory angiographic follow-up at 8 months was planned. One hundred percent site monitoring was conducted.

Results  Long lesions (59.2%), multi-vessel disease (50.4%), and small vessel disease (31.6%) were mostly found in angiography. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) occurred in 51 (5.1%) patients at 1 year clinical follow-up, including cardiac mortality in 6 (0.6%), non-fatal myocardial infarction in 11 (1.1%), and target lesion revascularization in 36 (3.5%) of the patients. Definite and probable stent thrombosis (ST) by Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definition occurred in 12 (1.36%) patients at one-year clinical follow-up. The 8-month binary restenosis rate was 5.7% in-segment and 4.3% in-stent, respectively. Late lumen loss was (0.21±0.40) mm in-segment and (0.23±0.36) mm in-stent, respectively. Furthermore, Cox regression analysis revealed that diabetes, small vessel diameter, and chronic total occlusion were independent predictors of ST.

Conclusions  The results showed that the Firebird SES was effective and safe in treating Chinese patients with complex coronary lesions and occurrence of ST rate at one-year clinical follow-up was acceptable, however further long-term follow-up was still necessary. (NCT00552656)