Literature DB >> 10716462

Procedural results and late clinical outcomes after percutaneous interventions using long (> or = 25 mm) versus short (< 20 mm) stents.

R Kornowski1, B Bhargava, S Fuchs, A J Lansky, L F Satler, A D Pichard, M K Hong, K M Kent, R Mehran, G W Stone, M B Leon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate clinical outcomes after the use of long coronary stents.
BACKGROUND: The use of long slotted-tube stents has been recently approved in the U.S. to treat long lesions or dissections. Procedural success and long-term outcomes of long versus short stents have not been established.
METHODS: We evaluated procedural success, major in-hospital complications, target lesion revascularization and long-term (one year) clinical outcomes in 1,226 consecutive patients (1,259 native coronary lesions) who underwent a single vessel intervention using a single long (> or =25 mm, 116 patients) or short (<20 mm, 1,110 patients) tubular-slotted stent.
RESULTS: Patients treated with long stents had more diffuse (>10 mm length) lesions (63% vs. 28%, p = 0.001). The mean stent length was 28 +/- 5 mm versus 15 +/- 2 mm for long versus short stent groups (p = 0.001). Overall procedural success was similar in the long versus short stent groups (96% vs. 98%, p = 0.08). However, major in-hospital complications tended to occur more frequently in patients treated with longer stents (3.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.04). The rate of periprocedural non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) (creatine kinase-MB > or =5 times normal) was notably higher after long stent implantation (23% vs. 11%, p = 0.001). Target lesion revascularization at one year was 14.5% vs. 13.8% (p = 0.69), and target vessel revascularization rate was 19.6% vs. 17.3% (p = 0.41) in the long versus short stent group, respectively. There was no difference in one year mortality (2.5% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.49) or Q-wave MI (2.7% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.48), and the overall cardiac event-free survival was similar for the two groups (81%).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of single coronary long (> or =25 mm) versus short (<20 mm) stents is associated with: 1) somewhat increased major procedural complications, 2) significantly higher frequency of periprocedural non-Q-wave MIs, and 3) equivalent repeat revascularization risk and cardiac event-free survival out-of-hospital up to one year.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10716462     DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00580-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  3 in total

1.  Drug eluting stents: maximising benefit and minimising cost.

Authors:  J Gunn; A C Morton; C Wales; C M H Newman; D C Crossman; D C Cumberland
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  Successful Treatment of Symptomatic Intracranial Carotid Artery Stenosis Using a 24-mm Long Bare Metal Coronary Stent.

Authors:  Azeem A Rehman; Ryan C Turner; Brandon P Lucke-Wold; SoHyun Boo
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2017-04-14       Impact factor: 2.104

3.  Safety and efficacy of Everolimus-Eluting bioabsorbable Polymer-Coated stent in patients with long coronary lesions: The EVOLVE 48 study.

Authors:  Dimitrios Karmpaliotis; Robert Stoler; Simon Walsh; Seif El-Jack; Srinivasa Potluri; Jeffrey Moses; Keith Oldroyd; Adrian Banning; Mark Webster; Azfar Zaman; Willis Wu; Mudassar Ahmed; Paul Underwood; Dominic Allocco
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 2.585

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.