CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Coronary fractional flow reserve in bifurcation stenoses: what have we learned? Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity Identification of High-Risk Plaques Destined to Cause Acute Coronary Syndrome Using Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography and Computational Fluid Dynamics Optimal Fluoroscopic Projections of Coronary Ostia and Bifurcations Defined by Computed Tomographic Coronary Angiography ‘Small bifurcation?’ CT myocardial mass volume measurements change therapeutic strategy in coronary artery disease Reply: Will Pulmonary Artery Denervation Really Have a Place in the Armamentarium of the Pulmonary Hypertension Specialist? Coronary CT Angiographic and Flow Reserve-Guided Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease One Versus 2-stent Strategy for the Treatment of Bifurcation Lesions in the Context of a Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: A Multicenter Registry T and small protrusion (TAP) vs double kissing crush technique: Insights from in-vitro models Classification and treatment of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: putting the Medina classification to the test

Original Research2005 Feb 1;45(3):351-6.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation

Park SJ, Kim YH, Lee BK et al. Keywords: Sirolimus-eluting stent; unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis; bare metal stent

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVESThis study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis.


BACKGROUNDThe safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained.

METHODSElective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years.

RESULTSCompared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONSSirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.