BACKGROUND: Although previously reported studies on coronary calcification mainly focused on its presence or absence in discrete focal target lesions, calcified coronary lesions (CCL) angiographically present as diffuse long lesions in some patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) on long CCL. METHODS: A total of 122 patients with 134 lesions (77 patients with 88 lesions for SES and 45 patients with 46 lesions for PES) were enrolled from 3 centers. Long CCL was defined visually as a culprit lesion with type B or C that was mainly due to coronary calcification with > 20 mm in total length by coronary angiography. Clinical follow-up was performed at 1 year and angiographic follow-up at 6 to 9 months after procedure. Major adverse coronary events (MACE) were defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat target-lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in baseline, procedural, or angiographic characteristics and in 1-year rates of all-cause death, MI, and TLR between the 2 groups (all P = NS [not significant]). Likewise, the cumulative incidence of MACE at 1 year was similar between the 2 groups (7.8% of patients in the SES group vs 4.4% of patients in the PES group, respectively, P = NS). In patients who underwent follow-up angiography, the angiographic binary restenosis rate was 6.2% in the SES group vs 12.1% in the PES group, respectively (P = NS). CONCLUSION: In patients with long CCL, both SES and PES were comparably effective in either angiographic or clinical long-term outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Although previously reported studies on coronary calcification mainly focused on its presence or absence in discrete focal target lesions, calcified coronary lesions (CCL) angiographically present as diffuse long lesions in some patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) on long CCL. METHODS: A total of 122 patients with 134 lesions (77 patients with 88 lesions for SES and 45 patients with 46 lesions for PES) were enrolled from 3 centers. Long CCL was defined visually as a culprit lesion with type B or C that was mainly due to coronary calcification with > 20 mm in total length by coronary angiography. Clinical follow-up was performed at 1 year and angiographic follow-up at 6 to 9 months after procedure. Major adverse coronary events (MACE) were defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat target-lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in baseline, procedural, or angiographic characteristics and in 1-year rates of all-cause death, MI, and TLR between the 2 groups (all P = NS [not significant]). Likewise, the cumulative incidence of MACE at 1 year was similar between the 2 groups (7.8% of patients in the SES group vs 4.4% of patients in the PES group, respectively, P = NS). In patients who underwent follow-up angiography, the angiographic binary restenosis rate was 6.2% in the SES group vs 12.1% in the PES group, respectively (P = NS). CONCLUSION: In patients with long CCL, both SES and PES were comparably effective in either angiographic or clinical long-term outcomes.