Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Reference Diameter (reference + diameter)
Selected AbstractsCoronary Artery Stenting in Vessels with Reference Diameter < 3 MMJOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY, Issue 5 2000ALFRIED GERMING M.D. The study included 220 consecutive patients with coronary artery stenting. In 128 patients (60.8 ± 10.2 years, 68% men), a total of 184 stents were placed in coronary vessels with a reference diameter < 3 mm (group S). One hundred thirty-four stents were implanted in 92 patients (62.9 ± 9.8 years, 82.6% men) in vessels > 3 mm (group L). There was no significant difference according to clinical baseline characteristics. The primary end point of this retrospective study was the rate of periinterventional complications (death, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, urgent angioplasty, or surgical revascularization). The, secondary end point was the clinical and angiographic follow-ups (restenosis, recurrent angina, further revascularization) after 3 months. Cardiac complications occurred in group S in two (1.6%) patients, two stent thromboses with urgent angioplasty, one Q-wave and one non-Q-wave infarction. There was one (1.1%) event in group L, a stent thrombosis with Q-wave infarction and urgent angioplasty. Angiography at 3-month follow-up was performed in 148 patients. Restenosis occurred in group S in 31.8% and in group L in 21.7% (NS). Data according recurrent angina and recommended surgical revascularization did not differ between both groups. In group S, significantly more angioplasties of the stented lesion were performed (23/60 patients) compared to group L (6/88) (P = 0,015). Coronary artery stenting in vessels with a reference diameter < 3 mm can be performed without a high rate of periinterventional complications. Restenosis tends to be more frequent in the small vessel group, a higher rate of reangioplasties have to be expected. The clinical follow-up is comparable to a control group. [source] Initial and Follow-Up Results of the European SeaquenceÔ Coronary Stent RegistryJOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY, Issue 1 2004MARTIAL HAMON M.D. The primary objective of the present study was to assess the feasibility and the safety of the SeaquenceÔ stent (CathNet-Science) deployment for the treatment of coronary artery disease and the event-free survival of patients treated with this coronary stent. The study was conducted as a multicenter, prospective, observational registry. Patients with stable or unstable angina pectoris who were candidates for percutaneous coronary intervention with elective stenting of one single de novo lesion in a native coronary artery ,3 mm in diameter were included in the study. Clinical follow-up was performed at 1 month and 9 months. Major adverse coronary events (MACE), that is, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (re-PTCA or CABG), were recorded over a period of 9 months. Using this stent, a 99% in-hospital success rate was achieved. A total of 17 patients presented MACE (8.7%) during the whole follow-up period and target lesion revascularization was needed for 14 (7.1%) patients. Using multivariate analysis only some clinical parameters (patients treated for unstable angina, with a history of CABG or of female gender) were found as independent predictors of MACE after coronary stenting. Procedural related factors, angiographic characteristics, or reference diameter were not found to influence clinical outcome. Because the study was performed in patients with a high proportion of complex lesions (relative high-risk nonselected population with nearly one third calcified lesions, many long and type B2 and C lesions) we can conclude that the coronary SeaquenceÔ stent can be considered as a stent of reference in routine practice. (J Interven Cardiol 2004;17:9,15) [source] Coronary Artery Stenting in Vessels with Reference Diameter < 3 MMJOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY, Issue 5 2000ALFRIED GERMING M.D. The study included 220 consecutive patients with coronary artery stenting. In 128 patients (60.8 ± 10.2 years, 68% men), a total of 184 stents were placed in coronary vessels with a reference diameter < 3 mm (group S). One hundred thirty-four stents were implanted in 92 patients (62.9 ± 9.8 years, 82.6% men) in vessels > 3 mm (group L). There was no significant difference according to clinical baseline characteristics. The primary end point of this retrospective study was the rate of periinterventional complications (death, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, urgent angioplasty, or surgical revascularization). The, secondary end point was the clinical and angiographic follow-ups (restenosis, recurrent angina, further revascularization) after 3 months. Cardiac complications occurred in group S in two (1.6%) patients, two stent thromboses with urgent angioplasty, one Q-wave and one non-Q-wave infarction. There was one (1.1%) event in group L, a stent thrombosis with Q-wave infarction and urgent angioplasty. Angiography at 3-month follow-up was performed in 148 patients. Restenosis occurred in group S in 31.8% and in group L in 21.7% (NS). Data according recurrent angina and recommended surgical revascularization did not differ between both groups. In group S, significantly more angioplasties of the stented lesion were performed (23/60 patients) compared to group L (6/88) (P = 0,015). Coronary artery stenting in vessels with a reference diameter < 3 mm can be performed without a high rate of periinterventional complications. Restenosis tends to be more frequent in the small vessel group, a higher rate of reangioplasties have to be expected. The clinical follow-up is comparable to a control group. [source] An everolimus-eluting stent versus a paclitaxel-eluting stent in small vessel coronary artery disease: A pooled analysis from the SPIRIT II and SPIRIT III trials,CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, Issue 1 2010Antonio L. Bartorelli MD Abstract Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent compared to the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent in small vessels. Backgroud: The XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent (EES) has been shown to improve angiographic and clinical outcomes after percutaneous myocardial revascularization, but its performance in small coronary arteries has not been investigated. Methods: In this pooled analysis, we studied a cohort of 541 patients with small coronary vessels (reference diameter <2.765 mm) by using patient and lesion level data from the SPIRIT II and SPIRIT III studies. TAXUS Express (73% of lesions) and TAXUS Liberté (27% of lesions) paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) were used as controls in SPIRIT II. In SPIRIT III, Taxus Express2 PES was the control. Results: Mean angiographic in-stent and in-segment late loss was significantly less in the EES group compared with the PES group, (0.15 ± 0.37 mm vs. 0.30 ± 0.44 mm; P = 0.011 for in-stent; 0.10 ± 0.38 mm vs. 0.21 ± 0.34 mm; P = 0.034 for in-segment). EES also resulted in a significant reduction in composite major adverse cardiac events at 1 year (19/366 [5.2%] vs. 17/159 [10.7%]; P = 0.037), due to fewer non-Q-wave myocardial infarctions and target lesion revascularizations. At 1 year, the rate of non-Q-wave myocardial infarction was significantly lower in the EES group compared with that of the PES group (6/366 [1.6%] vs. 8/159 [5.0%]; P = 0.037). Conclusions: In patients with small vessel coronary arteries, the XIENCE V EES was superior to the TAXUS PES. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Real-world bare metal stenting: Identification of patients at low or very low risk of 9-month coronary revascularizationCATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, Issue 2 2004Stephen G. Ellis MD Abstract The high cost of drug-eluting stents (DESs) has made identification of patients who are at low risk for subsequent revascularization after treatment with bare metal stents (BMSs) highly desirable. Previous reports from randomized trials suffer from biases induced by restricted entry criteria and protocol-mandated angiographic follow-up. Between 1994 and 2001, 5,239 consecutive BMS patients, excluding those with coil stents, technical failure, brachytherapy, staged procedure, or stent thrombosis within 30 days, were prospectively identified from a large single-center tertiary-referral-center prospective registry for long-term follow-up. We sought to identify characteristics of patients with very low (, 4%) or low (4,10%) likelihood of coronary revascularization 9 months after BMS. Nine-month clinical follow-up was obtained in 98.2% of patients. Coronary revascularization was required in 13.4% and did not differ significantly by stent type. On the basis of multivariate analysis identifying 11 independent correlates and previous reports, 20 potential low-risk patient and lesion groups (228 ± 356 patients/groups) were identified (e.g, patients with all of the following: native vessel, de novo, reference diameter , 3.5 mm, lesion length < 5 mm, no diabetes, not ostial in location). Actual and model-based outcomes were analyzed. No group had both predicted and observed 9-month revascularization , 4% (very low risk). Conversely, 19 of 20 groups had a predicted and observed revascularization rate of 4,10% (low risk). In the real-world setting, the need for intermediate-term revascularization after BMS may be lower than expected, but it may be very difficult to identify patients at very low risk. Conversely, if the benefits of DESs are attenuated in routine practice, many groups of patients treated with BMSs may have nearly comparable results. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;63:135,140. © 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] | ||||||||||