CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Definitions and classifications of bifurcation lesions and treatment Propensity-Matched 1-Year Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Bicuspid and Tricuspid Patients Defining cardiovascular toxicities of cancer therapies: an International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS) consensus statement Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction Definition, classification and diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension Viridans Streptococcal Biofilm Evades Immune Detection and Contributes to Inflammation and Rupture of Atherosclerotic Plaques Homocysteine metabolism as the target for predictive medical approach, disease prevention, prognosis, and treatments tailored to the person Endothelial ACKR3 drives atherosclerosis by promoting immune cell adhesion to vascular endothelium TRAP1 drives smooth muscle cell senescence and promotes atherosclerosis via HDAC3-primed histone H4 lysine 12 lactylation

Original ResearchVolume 13, Issue 7, April 2020

JOURNAL:JACC Article Link

Percutaneous Treatment and Outcomes of Small Coronary Vessels: A SCAAR Report

A Silverio, S Buccheri, G Sarno et al. Keywords: clinical outcomedrug-coated balloonsdrug-eluting stentspercutaneous coronary interventionsmall coronary vessels

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or newer-generation drug-eluting stents (n-DES).


BACKGROUND - Notwithstanding the available evidence from a few randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses, the best device for PCI in patients with small-vessel coronary artery disease is not yet established.


METHODS - The study included all consecutive patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing PCI in Sweden from April 2009 to July 2017. A small coronary vessel was defined by a device diameter ≤2.5 mm. The primary outcomes were restenosis and definite target lesion thrombosis at 3-year follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of all-cause death and myocardial infarction.


RESULTS - The study population included 14,788 patients: 1,154 treated with DCBs and 13,634 with n-DES. Overall, 35,541 PCIs were performed using 2,503 DCBs and 33,038 n-DES. The propensity score–adjusted regression analysis showed a significantly higher risk for restenosis in the DCB group compared with the n-DES group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.027; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.537 to 2.674). Conversely, no difference in the risk for target lesion thrombosis (adjusted HR: 0.741; 95% CI: 0.412 to 1.331) was detected. The risk for all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.178; 95% CI: 0.992 to 1.399) and myocardial infarction (adjusted HR: 1.251; 95% CI: 0.960 to 1.629) was comparable between groups.


CONCLUSIONS - Because of the significantly higher risk for restenosis up to 3 years, this research suggests that DCBs are not an equally effective alternative to n-DES for percutaneous treatment of small coronary vessels.