medigraphic.com
ISSN 0188-2198 (Print)

2005, Number 4

Next >>

Rev Mex Cardiol 2005; 16 (4)

The length stent modifies the clinical evolution of patients with percutaneous coronary intervention?

Rosas RA, Palacios RJ, Muñiz GA, De la Cruz OR, Reyes DS, Jáuregui RO, Ogaz GE, Maya PG

Language: Spanish
References: 31
Page: 139-145
PDF size: 84.79 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: In spite of development of stents, the restenosis intra-stent is a serious problem of percutaneous coronary intervention (ICP). Objective: Assessment of the influence of length stent in the clinical evolution of patients with ICP. Methods: The patients had the following critery inclusion: ICP between January 2000 to December 2003, at least one clinical assessment (6 months after the ICP we divided the study population in three groups: Group “A”: patients with length stent ‹ 15 mm; group “B” length stent between 15 to 30 mm and group “C” length stent ‹ 30 mm. Results: A total of 1,918 ICPs between January 2000 to December 2003 and only 1,084 (56.52%) had the inclusion, exclusion and no-inclusion criterious. The median age was 59.36 years and relation male/female was 4:1. The principal coronary risk factors found were tobacco and HAS. One third of population was diabetic. There is no difference between the three groups in the demographic and clinical variables. The group C (stents › 30 mm) had more angor events during the following six months of ICP than group A and B (A/B: p = 0.38; A/C: p = 0.009 and B/C: p = 0.045). Group “A” (stents ‹ 15 mm) had more patients in functional class (CF).I than group B and C (A/B: p = 0.003; B/C: p = 0.4 and A/C: p = 0.007). Finally group “C” need during the following more ICPs than group A and B (A/B: p = 0.7; B/C: p = 0.058 and A/C: p = 0.007). The rate of restenosis intra-stent was 6.84% (54/789 patients). The 42.86% of restenosis intra-stent group had length stents › 30 mm (group “C”); 28.4% of the group B and 17.5% of group A. Conclusion: The length stent modifies clinical evolution of patients with ICP. More longer. The length stent; more angor events, worse functional class and more ICPs during the following.


REFERENCES

  1. Diop D, Aghabiab D, Oslo R et al. Definition, classification and pathophysiology of acute coronary syndromes. Emergency Medicine of North America 2001; 19: 259-67.

  2. Weinstein M, Stason P, Robertson M et al. Cost-effectiveness of interventions to prevention or treat coronary heart diseases. Ann Rev Public Health 1985; 5: 41-5.

  3. Alpert J, Eagle K, Gardner T et al. AHA guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction with elevation segment ST. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 35: 171-92.

  4. Topol E, De Franco A, Williams P et al. Role of coronary angiography after acute myocardial infarction. In: Acute Coronary Syndromes. 2nd edition. 1999; 33: 391-5.

  5. Topol E, Aronow H, Craig R et al. Tratado de Cardiología Intervencionista. 4ta edición 2004; 21: 427-35.

  6. Michels K, Yusuf S, Koing G et al. Does PTCA in acute myocardial infarction affect mortality and reinfarction rates? A quantitative overview (meta-analysis) of the randomized trials. Circulation 1995; 91: 476-85.

  7. Stones G, Grines C, Browne K et al. Implications of recurrent ischemia after reperfusion therapy in acute myocardial infarction. A comparison of thrombolytic therapy and primary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 26: 66-72.

  8. Holmes D, Vliestra R, Smith H et al. Restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). A report from the PTCA Registry of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 53: 77C-88C.

  9. Gruentzig A, King S, Schlumpf et al. Long term follow up after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. The Early Zurich Experience. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 1127-32.

  10. Nobuyoschi M, Kimura T, Nosaka H et al. Restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Serial angioplasty follow up of 229 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 12: 616-23.

  11. Hirshfeld J, Schwartz J, Lugo R et al. Restenosis after coronary angioplasty. A multivariate statistical model to relate lesion and procedure variables to restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18: 647-56.

  12. Nobuyoschi M, Kimura T, Nosaka H et al. Restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Serial angioplasty follow up of 229 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 12: 616-23.

  13. Hirshfeld J, Schwartz J, Lugo R et al. Restenosis after coronary angioplasty. A multivariate statistical model to relate lesion and procedure variables to restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18: 647-56.

  14. Nake L, Fujita M, Fudo T et al. Relation between preexistent collateral circulation and the incidence of restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996; 27: 1688-92.

  15. Brodie R, Grines C, Ivanhoe R et al. Six month clinical and angiographic follow after direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1994; 90: 156-62.

  16. Mercado N, Boersma E, Wyns E et al. Clinical and quantitative coronary angiographic predictors of coronary restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 38: 645-52.

  17. Meadi C, Cummins C, Jolly R et al. Coronary artery stents in the treatment of ischaemic heart disease. A rapid and systematic review. Health Technol Assessment (Winchester-England) 2000; 4: 1-153.

  18. West N, Ruygrok P, Webster M et al. Clinical and angiographic predictors of restenosis after stent deployment in diabetic patients. Circulation 2004; 24: 867-73.

  19. Kasaoka S, Tobis J, Akuyama T et al. Angiographic and intravascular predictors of restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 32: 1630-5.

  20. Klugherz B, Kim D, Herman H et al. Three year of clinical follow up after Palmaz-Schatz stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996; 27: 1185-91.

  21. Ormiston J, Webster M, Ruygrak P et al. Six month angiographic and twelve month clinical follow up of multilink long (25-35 mm) stents for long coronary narrowings in patient with angor pectoris. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90: 222-26.

  22. Rauters C, Hubert E, Prat H et al. Predictors of restenosis alter coronary stent implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 31: 1220-31.

  23. Kao H, Wilson W, Roman C et al. Stent restenosis in a Chinese population. International Journal of Cardiology 2004; 12: 23-30.

  24. Morice MC, Serruys P, Sousa J et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 773-80.

  25. Park S, Shim W, Ho D et al. A paclitaxel eluting stent for the prevention of coronary restenosis. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 1537-45.

  26. Ruaraidh A, Dundar Y, Bakhai A et al. Drug-eluting stents: An early systematic review to inform policy. European Heart Journal 2004; 25: 902-19.

  27. Kastrati A, Schoming A, Elezi S et al. Predictive factors of restenosis after coronary placement. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 30: 1428-36.

  28. Kastrati A, Shpend E, Dirschinger J et al. Influence of lesion length on restenosis after coronary placement. Am J Cardiol 1999; 83: 1617-1622.

  29. Puretskii M, Abugov S, Saakian I et al. Results of coronary stenting in relation of the length of an implanted stent. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol 2003; 1: 36-42.

  30. Kobayashi Y, De Gregorio J, Kobayashi N et al. Stented segment length as an independent predictor of restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34: 651-9.

  31. Mauri L, O Malley J, Cutlip D et al. Effects of stent length and lesion length on coronary restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2004; 93: 1340-6.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com