CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Statin Safety and Associated Adverse Events: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Comparison of the Preventive Efficacy of Rosuvastatin Versus Atorvastatin in Post-Contrast Acute Kidney Injury in Patients With ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Relationship between therapeutic effects on infarct size in acute myocardial infarction and therapeutic effects on 1-year outcomes: A patient-level analysis of randomized clinical trials Prognostic impact of non-culprit chronic total occlusions in infarct-related cardiogenic shock: results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of DAPT disruption due to non-compliance vs. bleeding after PCI: insights from the PARIS Registry Effect of a Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusion Strategy on Major Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anemia: The REALITY Randomized Clinical Trial Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin in lowering LDL cholesterol : A meta-analysis of trials with East Asian populations An EAPCI Expert Consensus Document on Ischaemia with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries in Collaboration with European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Coronary Pathophysiology & Microcirculation Endorsed by Coronary Vasomotor Disorders International Study Group
|<<... 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 ...>>|

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.

>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