Literature DB >> 12652489

Multicenter randomized comparison of direct vs. conventional stenting: the DIRECTO trial.

Miguel A Ballarino1, Eduardo Moreyra, Aníbal Damonte, Alberto Sampaolesi, Scott Woodfield, Guillermo Pacheco, Gustavo Caballero, Eduardo Picabea, Jorge Baccaro, Luis Tapia, Esteban Ruiz Lascano.   

Abstract

With conventional stenting, predilatation frequently induces dissections that require deploying stents longer than originally planned. To assess whether direct stenting is safe and may prevent dissections and reduce the length of stents implanted, we conducted a randomized study comparing direct (n = 73) and conventional (n = 78) stenting. Direct stenting was successful in 89% of cases, 11% crossed over to predilation without complications. Dissections occurred more frequently in conventional stenting group (10.3% vs. 1.4%; P = 0.034), but did not translate to a significant stent length difference (16.31 +/- 7.6 vs. 15.31 +/- 5.5; P = NS). Periprocedure creatine kinase elevation and number of balloons utilized were lower with direct stenting. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12652489     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.10404

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  4 in total

1.  Direct coronary stenting in reducing radiation and radiocontrast consumption.

Authors:  Jasmin Caluk; Enes Osmanovic; Fahir Barakovic; Zumreta Kusljugic; Ibrahim Terzic; Selma Caluk; Amela Sofic
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 2.991

2.  Effect of direct stenting on microvascular dysfunction during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction: a randomized pilot study.

Authors:  Byung Gyu Kim; Sung Woo Cho; Jongkwon Seo; Gwang Sil Kim; Moo-Nyun Jin; Hye Young Lee; Young Sup Byun; Byung Ok Kim
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 1.573

3.  In-hospital and mid-term adverse clinical outcomes of a direct stenting strategy versus stenting after pre-dilatation for the treatment of coronary artery lesions.

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

4.  What is better for predilatation in bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: a non-compliant or a compliant balloon?

Authors:  Erdem Özel; Ahmet Taştan; Ali Öztürk; Emin Evren Özcan; Samet Uyar; Ömer Şenarslan
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 1.596

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.