CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic How Will the Transition to hs-cTn Affect the Diagnosis of Type 1 and 2 MI? 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization - The Task Force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association for Cardio- Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Comparison of Delay Times Between Symptom Onset of an Acute ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction and Hospital Arrival in Men and Women <65 Years Versus ≥65 Years of Age.: Findings From the Multicenter Munich Examination of Delay in Patients Experiencing Acute Myocardial Infarction (MEDEA) Study Silent Myocardial Infarction and Long-Term Risk of Heart Failure: The ARIC Study Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China Prognostic significance of QRS fragmentation and correlation with infarct size in patients with anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the INFUSE-AMI trial 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

Clinical Trial2017 Dec 20. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:J Interv Cardiol. Article Link

Outcomes after drug-coated balloon treatment for patients with calcified coronary lesions

Ito R, Ueno K, Yoshida T et al. Keywords: calcified coronary lesions; drug-coated balloon

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - To investigate the efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) for calcified coronary lesions.


BACKGROUND - Calcified coronary lesions is associated with poor clinical outcomes after revascularization. Recently, DCB is emerging as an alternative strategy for de novo coronary lesions. However, reports describing the efficacy of DCB for calcified coronary lesions are limited.


METHODS - A total of 81 patients (96 lesions) who electively underwent DCB treatment for de novo coronarylesions were enrolled: 46 patients (55 lesions) in the calcified group and 35 patients (41 lesions) in the non-calcified group. Angiographic follow-up data and clinical outcomes after the procedure were evaluated.


RESULTS - The diameter of the DCB used was 2.5 ± 0.5 mm. No bail-out stenting was observed after DCB treatment. Rotational atherectomy was used in 82% of lesions in the calcified group. Follow-up angiography (median, 6.5 months after intervention) was performed for 59 patients (30 in the calcified group and 29 in the non-calcified group). Late lumen loss and rates of restenosis were comparable between the groups (0.03 mm in the calcified group vs -0.18 mm in the non-calcified group, P = 0.093 and 13.9% vs 3.03%, P = 0.095, respectively). The survival rates for target lesion revascularization free survival and major adverse cardiac events at 2 years were comparable between the groups (85.3% vs 93.4%, P = 0.64 and 81.4% vs 88.5%, P = 0.57, respectively).


CONCLUSION - Calcified coronary lesions might dilute the effect of DCB. However, clinical outcomes in the calcified group were similar to those in the non-calcified group.


© 2017, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.