CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease? Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Clinical Outcome After DK Crush Versus Culotte Stenting of Distal Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: The 3-Year Follow-Up Results of the DKCRUSH-III Study EXCELling in Left Main Intervention Clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting stents or first-generation Paclitaxel-eluting stents for unprotected left main disease Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Left Main Disease: Pre- and Post-EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) and NOBLE (Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization Study) Era Impact of coronary anatomy and stenting technique on long-term outcome after drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease

Original Research2009 Jun;2(3):167-77.

JOURNAL:Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance on long-term mortality in stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis

Park SJ, Kim YH, MAIN-COMPARE Investigators et al. Keywords: IVUS; unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis; PCI; outcome

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Although intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance has been useful in stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis, its impact on long-term mortality is still unclear.


METHODS AND RESULTS - In the MAIN-COMPARE registry, patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in a hemodynamically stable condition underwent elective stenting under the guidance of IVUS (756 patients) or conventional angiography (219 patients). Patients with acute myocardial infarction were excluded. The 3-year outcomes between the 2 groups were primarily compared using propensity-score matching in the entire and separate populations according to stent type. In 201 matched pairs of the overall population, there was a tendency of lower risk of 3-year morality with IVUS guidance compared with angiography guidance (6.0% versus 13.6%, log-rank P=0.063; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.03; Cox-model P=0.061). In particular, in 145 matched pairs of patients receiving drug-eluting stent, the 3-year incidence of mortality was lower with IVUS guidance as compared with angiography guidance (4.7% versus 16.0%, log-rank P=0.048; hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.15 to 1.02; Cox model P=0.055). In contrast, the use of IVUS guidance did not reduce the risk of mortality in 47 matched pairs of patients receiving bare-metal stent (8.6% versus 10.8%, log-rank P=0.35; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.18 to 1.91; Cox model P=0.38). The risk of myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization was not associated with the use of IVUS guidance.

CONCLUSIONS - Elective stenting with IVUS guidance, especially in the placement of drug-eluting stent, may reduce the long-term mortality rate for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis when compared with conventional angiography guidance.