Related Experiment Videos
Endoluminal vessel reconstruction by stent placement in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease who are
E Eeckhout1, J C Stauffer, P Vogt
1Department of Internal Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Insights
Intracoronary stenting offers a viable treatment for complex coronary artery disease in patients ineligible for surgery. While successful, it shows higher restenosis rates compared to elective stenting.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Vascular Surgery
Background:
- Coronary artery disease (CAD) poses significant health risks.
- Surgical revascularization is not suitable for all patients.
- Endoluminal vessel reconstruction offers an alternative treatment pathway.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intracoronary stenting.
- To assess outcomes in patients with single or multivessel disease unsuitable for surgery.
Main Methods:
- Observational, single-center trial.
- 43 patients with complex CAD treated between 1995-1996.
- Clinical follow-up for at least six months, assessing procedural success, major adverse clinical events, and functional status.
Main Results:
- Acute procedural success in 39 patients (90.7%).
- Major adverse clinical events included death (3 patients), myocardial infarction, and subacute stent thrombosis.
- At two years, 65% of patients remained free from adverse clinical events, with 11 patients requiring repeat intervention due to restenosis.
Conclusions:
- Percutaneous reconstruction via stenting is a valuable option for select CAD patients.
- Higher rates of clinical restenosis observed compared to elective de novo stenting.
- Further research needed to optimize outcomes in this high-risk patient group.
Objective:
To investigate the safety and efficacy of endoluminal vessel reconstruction by intracoronary stenting in patients with single or multivessel disease who have been turned down for surgical revascularisation.
Design:
An observational, single centre trial of consecutive patients being followed up clinically.
Setting:
Tertiary referral centre.
Patients:
43 patients treated between 1995 and 1996 with a clinical follow up period of at least six months.
Main Outcome Measures:
Acute procedural success following intervention (defined as a residual stenosis of < 30% with normal antegrade flow and without acute clinical complications); major adverse clinical events (death, myocardial infarction, repeat intervention, clinical restenosis); and functional status during follow up.
Results:
Acute procedural success was achieved in 39 patients. Failures resulted from a refractory no reflow phenomenon with Q wave myocardial infarction (two patients), and from subacute stent thrombosis (one patient) and saphenous vein graft rupture at stent site (one patient), both manifesting by non-Q wave myocardial infarction. During a follow up period of 17 (8) months (mean (SD)), three of these patients died. Clinical restenosis was treated by repeat percutaneous intervention in 11 patients, while 28 patients remained asymptomatic. On a Kaplan-Meier estimate, the proportion of patients without adverse clinical events at two years was 65%.
Conclusions:
Percutaneous reconstruction of diseased coronary arteries in patients with single or multivessel disease turned down for surgical revascularisation may be considered as a valuable treatment option. On follow up, more events seem to be encountered than after elective de novo stenting of discrete coronary lesions. This is probably related to higher clinical restenosis rates.