CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Stenting Left Main

Abstract

Recommended Article

What Is the Optimal Revascularization Strategy for Left Main Coronary Stenosis? Current treatment of significant left main coronary artery disease: A review Why NOBLE and EXCEL Are Consistent With Each Other and With Previous Trials Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Native Coronary Arteries Versus on Saphenous Venous Aorta Coronary Conduits in Patients With Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Impella Device Implantation Achieved or Attempted (from the PROTECT II Randomized Trial and the cVAD Registry) Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary artery disease: the 13th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Percutaneous coronary intervention for the left main stem and other bifurcation lesions: 12th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Patient selection and percutaneous technique of unprotected left main revascularization
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...>>|

Clinical Trial2020 Jun 27.

JOURNAL：Catheter Cardiovasc Interv . Article Link

Impact of Lesion Preparation Strategies on Outcomes of Left Main PCI: The EXCEL Trial

N Beohar, S Chen, GW Stone et al. Keywords: lesion preparation left main coronary artery; PCI

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - We examined outcomes according to lesion preparation strategy (LPS) in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the EXCEL trial.

 

BACKGROUND - The optimal LPS for LMCA PCI is unclear.

 

METHODS - We categorized LPS hierarchically (high to low) as: (a) rotational atherectomy (RA); (b) cutting or scoring balloon (CSB); (c) balloon angioplasty (BAL); and d) direct stenting (DIR). The primary endpoint was 3‐year MACE; all‐cause death, stroke, or myocardial infarction.

 

RESULTS - Among 938 patients undergoing LMCA PCI, RA was performed in 6.0%, CSB 9.5%, BAL 71.3%, and DIR 13.2%. In patients treated with DIR, BAL, CSB, and RA, respectively, there was a progressive increase in SYNTAX score, LMCA complex bifurcation, trifurcation or calcification, number of stents, and total stent length. Any procedural complication occurred in 10.4% of cases overall, with the lowest rate in the DIR (7.4%) and highest in the RA group (16.1%) (p trend = .22). There were no significant differences in the 3‐year rates of MACE (from RA to DIR: 17.9%, 20.2%, 14.5%, 14.7%; p = .50) or ischemia‐driven revascularization (from RA to DIR: 16.8%, 10.8%, 12.3%, 14.2%; p = .65). The adjusted 3‐year rates of MACE did not differ according to LPS.

 

CONCLUSIONS - The comparable 3‐year outcomes suggest that appropriate lesion preparation may be able to overcome the increased risks of complex LMCA lesion morphology.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top