CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

急性冠脉综合征

科研文章

荐读文献

Complete or Culprit-Only Revascularization for Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Multivessel Versus Culprit-Vessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Cardiogenic Shock Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Alirocumab after Acute Coronary Syndrome According to Achieved Level of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES Trial Successful catheter ablation of electrical storm after myocardial infarction TACIT (High Sensitivity Troponin T Rules Out Acute Cardiac Insufficiency Trial): An Observational Study to Identify Acute Heart Failure Patients at Low Risk for Rehospitalization or Mortality In-Hospital Coronary Revascularization Rates and Post-Discharge Mortality Risk in Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome Cardiac monocytes and macrophages after myocardial infarction SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019 Open sesame technique in percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Clinical Trial2018 Aug 16.

JOURNAL:Cardiovasc Revasc Med. Article Link

A randomised trial comparing two stent sizing strategies in coronary bifurcation treatment with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - The Absorb Bifurcation Coronary (ABC) trial

Rampat R, Mayo T, Hildick-Smith D et al. Keywords: Absorb; BVS; Bioresorbable vascular scaffold; Coronary bifurcation

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUNDLimited information is available on the use of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (BVS) in bifurcations involving significant side branches. When treating bifurcation disease with metal stents, the recommendation is to choose a stent diameter based on the distal main vessel diameter. Whether this sizing strategy is applicable to BVS is currently unknown.


METHODS - We randomised 37 patients undergoing elective PCI for 'false' bifurcation disease (Medina 0,1,0; 1,0,0; 1,1,0) to receive BVS based either on proximal or distal reference diameters. Optical Frequency Domain Imaging (OFDI) measurements were performed pre BVS insertion to obtain proximal and distal reference diameters and post implantation. BVS size was chosen according to the proximal or distal reference diameter as per randomisation. Implantation was performed using the PSP technique tailored to bifurcation stenting. OFDI was repeated post implantation to confirm satisfactory expansion and apposition.

RESULTS - Baseline demographics between the two groups were similar. Patients were aged 62.8 ± 3.3 years; 76% were male. Mean side branch diameter was 2.24 ± 0.13 mm. TIMI III flow in the main vessel was achieved in all cases. Side branch occlusion occurred in 1 case (2.7%). In the distal-sizing arm, there was a greater incidence of significant malapposition (>300 μm) at the proximal end of the scaffold on OCT (2.3% versus 0.8%, p 0.023). The incidence of distal edge dissections was numerically greater in the proximal-sizing group but this was not statistically significant (31.3% vs 11.8%, p 0.17).

CONCLUSION - Both proximal and distal sizing strategies have similar procedural complication rates when using the ABSORB BVS to treat coronary bifurcations. However a proximal sizing strategy is associated with less malapposition and may be preferable.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.