CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

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 Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing 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 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. Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study
|<<... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...>>|

Clinical Trial2020 Jun 27.

JOURNAL：Catheter Cardiovasc Interv . Article Link

Impact of Lesion Preparation Strategies on Outcomes of Left Main PCI: The EXCEL Trial

N Beohar, S Chen, GW Stone et al. Keywords: lesion preparation left main coronary artery; PCI

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - We examined outcomes according to lesion preparation strategy (LPS) in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the EXCEL trial.

 

BACKGROUND - The optimal LPS for LMCA PCI is unclear.

 

METHODS - We categorized LPS hierarchically (high to low) as: (a) rotational atherectomy (RA); (b) cutting or scoring balloon (CSB); (c) balloon angioplasty (BAL); and d) direct stenting (DIR). The primary endpoint was 3‐year MACE; all‐cause death, stroke, or myocardial infarction.

 

RESULTS - Among 938 patients undergoing LMCA PCI, RA was performed in 6.0%, CSB 9.5%, BAL 71.3%, and DIR 13.2%. In patients treated with DIR, BAL, CSB, and RA, respectively, there was a progressive increase in SYNTAX score, LMCA complex bifurcation, trifurcation or calcification, number of stents, and total stent length. Any procedural complication occurred in 10.4% of cases overall, with the lowest rate in the DIR (7.4%) and highest in the RA group (16.1%) (p trend = .22). There were no significant differences in the 3‐year rates of MACE (from RA to DIR: 17.9%, 20.2%, 14.5%, 14.7%; p = .50) or ischemia‐driven revascularization (from RA to DIR: 16.8%, 10.8%, 12.3%, 14.2%; p = .65). The adjusted 3‐year rates of MACE did not differ according to LPS.

 

CONCLUSIONS - The comparable 3‐year outcomes suggest that appropriate lesion preparation may be able to overcome the increased risks of complex LMCA lesion morphology.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top