CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Intravascular ultrasound predictors for edge restenosis after newer generation drug-eluting stent implantation Histopathologic validation of the intravascular ultrasound diagnosis of calcified coronary artery nodules A volumetric intravascular ultrasound comparison of early drug-eluting stent thrombosis versus restenosis Mechanical complications of everolimus-eluting stents associated with adverse events: an intravascular ultrasound study Impact of plaque components on no-reflow phenomenon after stent deployment in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a virtual histology-intravascular ultrasound analysis Comparison of intravascular ultrasound versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: a meta-analysis of one randomised trial and ten observational studies involving 19,619 patients Differential prognostic effect of intravascular ultrasound use according to implanted stent length Intravascular ultrasound-guided vs angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation in complex coronary lesions: Meta-analysis of randomized trials

Original Research2005 Feb 1;45(3):351-6.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation

Park SJ, Kim YH, Lee BK et al. Keywords: Sirolimus-eluting stent; unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis; bare metal stent

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVESThis study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis.


BACKGROUNDThe safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained.

METHODSElective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years.

RESULTSCompared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONSSirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.