Home  About us  Contact
 

Single Stent (single + stent)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Selected Abstracts

Clinical Outcomes for Single Stent and Multiple Stents in Contemporary Practice

CLINICAL CARDIOLOGY, Issue 9 2009
Qiao Shu Bin MD
Background Stents had been demonstrated to be safe and effective in the treatment of severe coronary artery disease (CAD); however, the current knowledge on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in treating patients requiring 2 or more stents placements is still limited. Hypothesis Patients who required 2 or more stents might have worse clinical outcomes. Methods A total of 2371 patients who underwent stenting were divided into a single stenting group (n = 1233) and a multiple stenting group (n = 1138). We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (death, acute myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization) and stent thrombosis during 1-year follow-up. Results The 1-year unadjusted cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 7.7% in the multiple stenting group and 5.4% in the single stenting group (P = 0.02 by log-rank test). After adjustment, there was a trend toward a lower rate of 1-year major adverse cardiac events in the single stenting group than in the multiple stenting group (P = 0.09). A nonsignificant trend was also detected in favor of the single stenting group, as compared with the multiple stenting group, at the rate of acute myocardial infarction (1.3% vs 1.7%, P = 0.89) and at the rate of target-vessel revascularization (4.5% vs 5.4%, P = 0.08). Conclusions Although the use of a single stent in coronary artery disease has less incidence of adverse cardiac events at 1 year as compared with the use of multiple stents, the difference was not statistically significant. Copyright © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source]

ENDOSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF BILIARY STRICTURES

DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, Issue 2004
Yoshitsugu Kubota
ABSTRACT Endoscopic stenting, due to being less invasive, is feasible for most patients with biliary strictures; however, presumed efficacy should be balanced against the procedure-related morbidities for an individual patient. Self-expandable metallic stents have a longer patency, but are not retrievable. Therefore, the use of self-expandable metallic stents should be limited to those with unequivocal findings of unresectable malignancy. Plastic stents are indicated for strictures due to benign etiologies and equivocal malignancy. Endoscopic stenting for hilar biliary stricture is challenging. Bilateral hepatic drainage seems ideal but is often demanding to achieve with endoscopic technique, and contrast injection into undrained segments may pose a substantial risk for cholangitis and aggravate prognosis. Therefore, the extent of drainage should be balanced against the procedure-related complications. Preoperative magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography may help determine feasibility of bilateral drainage or an ,intended and selective drainage' with a single stent and might obviate the possible morbidities. [source]

Bifurcation lesion treated with a single stent: A new technique

CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, Issue 2 2005
Deniz Kumbasar MD
Abstract Treatment of bifurcation lesions by percutaneous coronary interventions is one of the challenging issues for the interventional cardiologists. The overall complication rate is higher than nonbifurcation lesions. We describe a new stenting technique for the so-called true bifurcation lesions. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source]

Clinical Outcomes for Single Stent and Multiple Stents in Contemporary Practice

CLINICAL CARDIOLOGY, Issue 9 2009
Qiao Shu Bin MD
Background Stents had been demonstrated to be safe and effective in the treatment of severe coronary artery disease (CAD); however, the current knowledge on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in treating patients requiring 2 or more stents placements is still limited. Hypothesis Patients who required 2 or more stents might have worse clinical outcomes. Methods A total of 2371 patients who underwent stenting were divided into a single stenting group (n = 1233) and a multiple stenting group (n = 1138). We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (death, acute myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization) and stent thrombosis during 1-year follow-up. Results The 1-year unadjusted cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 7.7% in the multiple stenting group and 5.4% in the single stenting group (P = 0.02 by log-rank test). After adjustment, there was a trend toward a lower rate of 1-year major adverse cardiac events in the single stenting group than in the multiple stenting group (P = 0.09). A nonsignificant trend was also detected in favor of the single stenting group, as compared with the multiple stenting group, at the rate of acute myocardial infarction (1.3% vs 1.7%, P = 0.89) and at the rate of target-vessel revascularization (4.5% vs 5.4%, P = 0.08). Conclusions Although the use of a single stent in coronary artery disease has less incidence of adverse cardiac events at 1 year as compared with the use of multiple stents, the difference was not statistically significant. Copyright © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source]