CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Successful bailout stenting strategy against lethal coronary dissection involving left main bifurcation Intravascular Ultrasound to Guide Left Main Stem Intervention: A Sub-Study of the NOBLE Trial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Operator Experience and Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention 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 Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Do We Have the Evidence? Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention. Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization

Clinical Trial1989 Jul 15;64(3):144-7

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Left main coronary angioplasty: early and late results of 127 acute and elective procedures

O'Keefe JH Jr, Hartzler GO, Rutherford BD Keywords: left main coronary angioplasty; first description; ULMCA; LMCA; mortality

ABSTRACT


The results of 127 left main (LM) coronary angioplasties were reviewed to assess short- and long-term effectiveness. Three major subgroups were considered: (1) elective "protected" (defined as the presence of a patent bypass graft to the left coronary circulation) patients (n = 84); (2) elective "unprotected" patients (n = 33); and (3) acute patients, in whom LM coronary angioplasty was performed in the setting of an acute myocardial infarction (n = 10). Successful LM dilation was achieved in 94% of elective patients and 90% of acute patients. Procedural mortality was 4.3% in elective patients (2.4 and 9.1% in protected and unprotected patients, respectively, p = 0.14) and 50% in the acute subgroup. Long-term follow-up data, available for 98% of patients, revealed actuarial 3-year survival rates of 90 and 36% in elective protected and unprotected subgroups, respectively (p less than 0.0005). In the acute subgroup, 3 patients (30%) were alive at the time of follow-up; all had undergone coronary artery bypass surgery. Thus, although elective angioplasty of an unprotected LM coronary artery is technically feasible, the long-term prognosis of such patients is very poor. LM angioplasty in this subgroup should be reserved for patients in whom surgical revascularization is not an option. In contrast, elective angioplasty of a protected LM coronary artery can be accomplished safely with good long-term results. LM coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction can be effective as a salvage procedure; however, adjunctive coronary bypass surgery is important for long-term survival.