Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/76999
Title: Rapamycin-eluting stents for the treatment of bifurcated coronary lesions: A randomized comparison of a simple versus complex strategy
Authors: Pan, Manuel
Suárez de Lezo, José
Medina, Alfonso
Romero, Miguel
Segura, José
Pavlovic, Djordje
Delgado, Antonio
Ojeda, Soledad
Melián, Francisco
Herrador, Juan
Ureña, Isabel
Burgos, Luis
UNESCO Clasification: 320501 Cardiología
Keywords: Immediate
Implantation
Restenosis
Stenosis
Arteries
Issue Date: 2004
Journal: The American heart journal 
Abstract: Background Rapamycin-eluting stents (RES) have been shown to reduce restenosis in many types of lesions. However, the ideal strategy for the treatment of coronary bifurcated lesions has not been established to date. This randomized study compares 2 strategies for the RES treatment of bifurcation lesions: a simple approach (stenting the main vessel and balloon dilatation for the side branch [SB]) versus a complex approach (stents for both vessels).Methods To compare both strategies, a randomized study was conducted in 91 patients with true coronary bifurcation lestions. All patients received an RES at the main vessel, covering the SB. Patients from group A (n = 47) were assigned to balloon dilation of the involved SB (simple strategy); patients in group B (n = 44) were randomized to receive a second stent at the SB origin (complex strategy). There were no differences between groups regarding baseline clinical and angiographic data.Results Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 3 patients from group A (2 non-Q-wave myocardial infarctions and 1 target lesion revascularization). Six-month angiographic reevaluation was obtained in 80 patients (88%). Restenosis of the main vessel was observed in 1 (2%) patient from group A and in 4 (10%) from group B. Restenosis of the SB appeared in 2 (5%) patients from group A and in 6 (15%) from group B.Conclusions Both strategies are effective in reducing the restenosis rate, with no differences in terms of clinical outcome. Elective SB stenting seems to provide no advantages over the simpler stent jail followed by SB balloon dilation.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/76999
ISSN: 0002-8703
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.05.029
Source: American Heart Journal [ISSN 0002-8703], v. 148 (5), p. 857-864, (Noviembre 2004)
Appears in Collections:Artículos
Show full item record

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

217
checked on May 9, 2021

Page view(s)

39
checked on May 10, 2021

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.