CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Frequency of nonsystem delays in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and implications for door-to-balloon time reporting (from the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline program) Red Cell Distribution Width in Patients with Diabetes and Myocardial Infarction: an analysis from the EXAMINE trial Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients How Low to Go With Glucose, Cholesterol, and Blood Pressure in Primary Prevention of CVD 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes: The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Association of Acute Procedural Results with Long-term Outcomes After CTO-PCI The Future of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Advanced Analytics and Clinical Insights Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Interventions Across the Entire Spectrum of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

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.