OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the influence of vessel size on the outcomes of patients after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. BACKGROUND: There are no dedicated studies on the influence of vessel size on the outcomes of patients treated with different DES. METHODS: The study population was composed of 2,058 consecutive patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Patients were grouped into tertiles according to vessel size (<2.41 mm in the lower tertile, 2.41 to 2.84 mm in the middle tertile, and >2.84 mm in the upper tertile). The primary end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary end points were binary angiographic restenosis and the composite of death or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Vessel size did not influence the composite end point of death and myocardial infarction. The TLR rates were higher among patients in the lower tertile (12.1%) as compared with the middle (8.4%) and upper (8.0%) tertiles (p = 0.02). In a multivariate analysis, vessel size emerged an independent predictor of TLR (p = 0.009). The model showed also a significant interaction between DES type and vessel size regarding TLR (p = 0.008). There was a significant difference in TLR rates among patients treated with SESs (8.6%) and PESs (16.4%) in the lower tertile (p = 0.002), but not in the middle and upper tertiles. CONCLUSIONS: The influence of vessel size on restenosis is related to the specific DES used, with SESs providing better outcomes than PESs in small but not in large coronary vessels.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the influence of vessel size on the outcomes of patients after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. BACKGROUND: There are no dedicated studies on the influence of vessel size on the outcomes of patients treated with different DES. METHODS: The study population was composed of 2,058 consecutive patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Patients were grouped into tertiles according to vessel size (<2.41 mm in the lower tertile, 2.41 to 2.84 mm in the middle tertile, and >2.84 mm in the upper tertile). The primary end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary end points were binary angiographic restenosis and the composite of death or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Vessel size did not influence the composite end point of death and myocardial infarction. The TLR rates were higher among patients in the lower tertile (12.1%) as compared with the middle (8.4%) and upper (8.0%) tertiles (p = 0.02). In a multivariate analysis, vessel size emerged an independent predictor of TLR (p = 0.009). The model showed also a significant interaction between DES type and vessel size regarding TLR (p = 0.008). There was a significant difference in TLR rates among patients treated with SESs (8.6%) and PESs (16.4%) in the lower tertile (p = 0.002), but not in the middle and upper tertiles. CONCLUSIONS: The influence of vessel size on restenosis is related to the specific DES used, with SESs providing better outcomes than PESs in small but not in large coronary vessels.
Authors: Iñigo Lozano; Carlos Cuellas; Pablo Avanzas; Armando Pérez de Prado; Concepción Suárez; Juan Rondan; Daehyun Lee; Jesus M de la Hera; Felipe Fernández; César Morís Journal: Tex Heart Inst J Date: 2011
Authors: Martin Unverdorben; Franz X Kleber; Hubertus Heuer; Hans-Reiner Figulla; Christian Vallbracht; Matthias Leschke; Bodo Cremers; Stefan Hardt; Michael Buerke; Hanns Ackermann; Michael Boxberger; Ralf Degenhardt; Bruno Scheller Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2010-01-06 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Rosaly A Buiten; Eline H Ploumen; Paolo Zocca; Carine J M Doggen; Liefke C van der Heijden; Marlies M Kok; Peter W Danse; Carl E Schotborgh; Martijn Scholte; Frits H A F de Man; Gerard C M Linssen; Clemens von Birgelen Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Maciej T Wybraniec; Paweł Bańka; Tomasz Bochenek; Tomasz Roleder; Katarzyna Mizia-Stec Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: Connie N Hess; Sunil V Rao; David Dai; Megan L Neely; Robert N Piana; John C Messenger; Eric D Peterson Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2014-01-04 Impact factor: 4.749