Search

Background: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation improves the outcome in simple coronary artery lesions compared with bare metal stents, but there is limited evidence of their safety and efficacy when implanted in complex lesions like coronary bifurcations. Methods: SCANDSTENT was a randomized controlled study comparing implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents in patients with complex coronary artery disease. This substudy evaluates the angiographic and clinical outcome of 126 patients with lesions located in a coronary bifurcation. Results: The baseline characteristics of the patients were comparable: 15% had diabetes, and 1.7 stents were implanted per lesion. At follow-up, the minimum lumen diameter of the main branch was 2.35 mm in patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents compared with 1.68 mm in those who received bare-metal stents, and that of the side branch was 1.70 versus 1.19 mm (both P < .001). The late lumen loss in the main branch was 0.12 mm in the sirolimus-eluting stent group versus 0.99 mm in the bare-metal stent group and 0.03 versus 0.56 mm in the side branch (both P < .001). Thus, sirolimus-eluting stents reduced the restenosis rate from 28.3% to 4.9% in the main branch and from 43.4% to 14.8% in the side branches (both P < .001). Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 9% with sirolimus-eluting stents versus 28% with bare-metal stents (P = .01), and stent thrombosis was observed in 0% versus 9% (P = .02). Conclusion: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation improves both the angiographic and clinical outcomes considerably compared with that of bare-metal stents in patients with stenoses located in coronary bifurcations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We aimed to relate the amount of jeopardized myocardium to mortality in shocked patients presenting to the catheterization laboratory with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock.Background: In contrast with historical data and previous professional guidance, contemporary randomized data suggest that multi-vessel revascularization in such patients does not improve survival; mechanistic insight is incomplete.Methods: Clinical databases identified cases of STEMI and shock triaged for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) in Eastern Denmark from June 2011 to December 2014 (n = 128). British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS)-1 jeopardy scores were calculated from angiography. The study endpoint was 30-day mortality.Results: Median lactate values were 6.0 [2.9-10.7] mmol/L. 30-day mortality was 53.9%. 68% of patients had multi-vessel coronary disease. Median pre-PCI BCIS-1 myocardial jeopardy scores were 8 [6-10]. After multiple logistic regression increasing age (p = 0.008; odds ratio [OR] 1.06), lactate values (p = 0.017; OR 1.02), mechanical ventilation (p = 0.011; OR 1.25) and a systolic blood pressure ≤ 90 mmHg at end-case (p = 0.005; OR 1.26) were predictive of 30-day mortality. Post-PPCI culprit vessel TIMI 3 flow was associated with reduced mortality (p < 0.001; OR 0.66). There was no association between pre-PCI jeopardy scores and the primary endpoint.Conclusions: In patients with STEMI and shock, myocardial jeopardy scores do not relate to patient outcomes. Jeopardy scores may be applied to existing datasets in order to understand why multi-vessel revascularization does not lead to the anticipated clinical benefits in cardiogenic shock. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies have shown a poor correlation between angiographic assessment of stenosis grade (%) and its functional assessment by fractional flow reserve (FFR). This study aimed to investigate whether a more comprehensive evaluation of the coronary angiogram may contribute to a better identification of flow-limiting stenoses. Coronary angiograms of 1,350 patients (1,883 lesions) were retrospectively analyzed for stenosis grade (eyeballing, %) and matched with FFR values. Angiography-derived optimal cut-off values and intervals delineating the [90% sensitivity--90% specificity] range were 50.8% [42.5-- 65.0%] for the left main (LM), 62.2% [50.0--72.5%] for the proximal (prox)/mid left anterior descending (LAD) artery, 66.3% [57.5--77.5%] for the prox/mid right coronary artery (RCA), 70.5% [60.0--80.0%] for the prox left circumflex/first obtuse marginal (LCX/OM1), and 71.4% [62.5--82.5%] for the more distal segments. In patients with intermediate LAD lesions, 5 angiographic parameters were identified as independent predictors of flow limitation: (1) a 30--50% lesion prox to the lesion of interest, (2) lesion length >20 mm, (3) distal take-off of all diagonal branches ≥2 mm diameter, (4) "apical wrap" of LAD, and (5) collaterals to an occluded LCX/RCA. Based on these results, a risk score (P20-DAC2) for prediction of flow limitation in intermediate LAD lesions was derived. In conclusion, a comprehensive evaluation of the coronary angiogram--in which besides stenosis grade also other lesion/vessel characteristics are evaluated--can lead to a more accurate identification of functionally significant coronary stenoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]