AIMS: Given the different pathogenesis, use of drug eluting stent (DES) in patients with Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection SCAD may delay the healing of the dissected vessel. Aim of our study was to compare the safety and the efficacy of DES vs. bare metal stent (BMS) in a cohort of patients who underwent stenting for SCAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with SCAD between January 1995 and August 2014 were retrospectively identified in 12 centers and included. Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) was the primary end point. A total of 238 SCAD patients were identified: of them 108 patients underwent PCI with DES or BMS. Overall 24 patients (22.2%) suffered an intra-procedural complication without any differences between the 2 groups. At median follow-up of 1201days (Inter Quartile Range 541-2760), incidence of the primary endpoint showed a trend towards less events in the DES-treated patients (38.7% vs. 25.9% p=0.14) mainly driven by the benefit of DES in terms of TVR (17.6% vs. 4%, p=0.08), mortality (16.8% vs. 9.3%, p=0.4), and MI rate (16% vs. 8.4%, p=0.33). STEMI at presentation (HR 6.4, CI 95% 1.29-31.9, p=0.02) but not kind of stent (HR 0.97, CI 95% 0.2-4.7, p=0.9) emerged as independently related to prognosis at multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In SCAD patients use of DES seems to be as safe as BMS with trend of better efficacy in the long term.
AIMS: Given the different pathogenesis, use of drug eluting stent (DES) in patients with Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection SCAD may delay the healing of the dissected vessel. Aim of our study was to compare the safety and the efficacy of DES vs. bare metal stent (BMS) in a cohort of patients who underwent stenting for SCAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with SCAD between January 1995 and August 2014 were retrospectively identified in 12 centers and included. Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) was the primary end point. A total of 238 SCAD patients were identified: of them 108 patients underwent PCI with DES or BMS. Overall 24 patients (22.2%) suffered an intra-procedural complication without any differences between the 2 groups. At median follow-up of 1201days (Inter Quartile Range 541-2760), incidence of the primary endpoint showed a trend towards less events in the DES-treated patients (38.7% vs. 25.9% p=0.14) mainly driven by the benefit of DES in terms of TVR (17.6% vs. 4%, p=0.08), mortality (16.8% vs. 9.3%, p=0.4), and MI rate (16% vs. 8.4%, p=0.33). STEMI at presentation (HR 6.4, CI 95% 1.29-31.9, p=0.02) but not kind of stent (HR 0.97, CI 95% 0.2-4.7, p=0.9) emerged as independently related to prognosis at multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In SCAD patients use of DES seems to be as safe as BMS with trend of better efficacy in the long term.
Authors: Ryan Clare; Lewei Duan; Derek Phan; Naing Moore; Michael Jorgensen; Anne Ichiuji; Albert Y Shen; Ming-Sum Lee Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Marcos Garcia-Guimarães; Teresa Bastante; Paula Antuña; César Jimenez; Francisco de la Cuerda; Javier Cuesta; Fernando Rivero; Diluka Premawardhana; David Adlam; Fernando Alfonso Journal: Eur Cardiol Date: 2020-02-26