AIMS: To assess the safety of direct coronary stenting, its influence on costs, duration of the procedure, radiation exposure, clinical outcome and angiographic restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomized 416 patients (446 lesions) todirect stent implant or stent implant following balloon pre-dilation. Patients >75 years old, heavily calcified lesions, bifurcations, total occlusions, left main lesions and very tortuous vessels were excluded. Direct stenting was successful in 217/224 lesions (96.8%). No single loss or embolization of the stent occurred. All stents in the group with pre-dilation were effectively deployed. The immediate post-procedure angiographic results were similar with both techniques. Fluoroscopy and procedural time were significantly lower in direct stenting (6.4+/-0.3 and 21+/-0.9 min) than in pre-dilated stenting (9.1+/-0.4 and 27.5+/-1.1 min) (P>0.001). Major adverse cardiac events during hospitalization were one in direct and four in pre-dilated stenting (P=0.05) but there were no significant differences at follow-ups at 1, 6 and 12 months between the two groups. Angiographic reevaluation at 6 months was performed in 94% of the cases. Restenosis rate was 16.5% in direct stenting and 14.3% in pre-dilated stenting (P=ns). CONCLUSIONS:Direct stenting is as safe as pre-dilated stenting in selected coronary lesions. Acute angiographic results are similar but procedural costs, duration of the procedure and radiation exposure are lower in direct stenting. Overall success rate, mid-term clinical outcome and restenosis are similar with both techniques. Copyright 2002 The European Society of Cardiology.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To assess the safety of direct coronary stenting, its influence on costs, duration of the procedure, radiation exposure, clinical outcome and angiographic restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomized 416 patients (446 lesions) to direct stent implant or stent implant following balloon pre-dilation. Patients >75 years old, heavily calcified lesions, bifurcations, total occlusions, left main lesions and very tortuous vessels were excluded. Direct stenting was successful in 217/224 lesions (96.8%). No single loss or embolization of the stent occurred. All stents in the group with pre-dilation were effectively deployed. The immediate post-procedure angiographic results were similar with both techniques. Fluoroscopy and procedural time were significantly lower in direct stenting (6.4+/-0.3 and 21+/-0.9 min) than in pre-dilated stenting (9.1+/-0.4 and 27.5+/-1.1 min) (P>0.001). Major adverse cardiac events during hospitalization were one in direct and four in pre-dilated stenting (P=0.05) but there were no significant differences at follow-ups at 1, 6 and 12 months between the two groups. Angiographic reevaluation at 6 months was performed in 94% of the cases. Restenosis rate was 16.5% in direct stenting and 14.3% in pre-dilated stenting (P=ns). CONCLUSIONS: Direct stenting is as safe as pre-dilated stenting in selected coronary lesions. Acute angiographic results are similar but procedural costs, duration of the procedure and radiation exposure are lower in direct stenting. Overall success rate, mid-term clinical outcome and restenosis are similar with both techniques. Copyright 2002 The European Society of Cardiology.
Authors: K D Dawkins; T Gershlick; M de Belder; A Chauhan; G Venn; P Schofield; D Smith; J Watkins; H H Gray Journal: Heart Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Jacques Boschat; Hervé Le Breton; P Commeau; Bernard Huret; Marc Bedossa; Martine Gilard Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: M Alidoosti; M Salarifar; S E Kassaian; A M Zeinali; M S Fathollahi; M R Dehkordi Journal: Cardiovasc J Afr Date: 2008 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.167