CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry Why NOBLE and EXCEL Are Consistent With Each Other and With Previous Trials Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Do We Have the Evidence? Successful bailout stenting strategy against lethal coronary dissection involving left main bifurcation Management of left main disease: an update Meta-Analysis of Comparison of 5-Year Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery in the Era of Drug-eluting Stents Differential prognostic impact of treatment strategy among patients with left main versus non-left main bifurcation lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry II Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Clinical Trial2010 Mar 1;75(4):578-83.

JOURNAL:Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Long-term health outcome and mortality evaluation after invasive coronary treatment using drug eluting stents with or without the IVUS guidance. Randomized control trial. HOME DES IVUS

Jakabcin J, Spacek R, Bystron M et al. Keywords: IVUS guided PCI; DES; outcome

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVE - To assess the role of the intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) during implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) on long-term outcome in patients with complex coronary artery disease and high clinical risk profile with special attention to the development of late stent thrombosis (LST).


METHODS - Two hundred and ten patients were randomly assigned to receive DES either with (N = 105) or without (N = 105) the IVUS guidance. Dual antiplatelet treatment was administered for 6 months in all patients. At 18-month follow-up, the rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (death, myocardial infarction, and reintervention) were assessed in both groups with special attention to possible LST. Stent thrombosis was classified according to Academic Research Consortium (ARC).


RESULTS - At the 18-month follow-up, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding MACE (11% vs. 12%; P = NS). Stent thrombosis has occurred in four patients (3.8%) in the group with and in 6 patients (5.7%; P = NS) in the group without the IVUS guidance.


CONCLUSIONS - In our randomized trial we failed to demonstrate the superiority of the IVUS guidance during DES implantation over standard high-pressure postdilatation. However we confirmed worrisome results concerning DES thrombosis after discontinuation of dual antiplatelet-treatment with documented stent thrombosis related events in almost 5% of patients with 50% of mortality in this high-risk clinical scenario.