Search

Prospective randomized, multicentre study.Recanalisation of the culprit lesion is the main goal of primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. With the exception of cardiogenic shock, staged procedures are performed in the presence of multivessel disease. The study hypothesis is that with modern non-thrombogenic stents (heparin coated) complete revascularization with multivessel treatment can be safely achieved during the primary angioplasty procedure with a lower need of subsequent revascularization procedures and at a lower cost.PRIMARY: 12-month incidence of repeat revascularization (any revascularization, infarct related artery as well as non-infarct-related artery). SECONDARY: (1) in hospital repeat revascularization, reinfarction and death; (2) total hospital cost (including a 12 months follow-up period).69 patients with ST elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI),12 hours after symptoms onset, undergoing primary angioplasty, with documented multivessel disease and both culprit lesion and 1 to 3 other lesions suitable for stent implantation. Unbalanced randomization between culprit lesion treatment only (n = 17) and complete multivessel treatment (n = 52, with 71 additional lesions treated).The two groups were well balanced in terms of clinical characteristics, number of diseased vessels and angiographic characteristics of the culprit lesion. In the complete multivessel treatment group 2.36 +/- 0.64 lesions per patient were treated using 2.73 +/- 0.78 heparin coated stents (1.00 lesions and 1.29 +/- 0.61 stents in the culprit treatment group, both p0.001). The duration of the procedure increased from 53 +/- 21 min (culprit treatment group) to 69 +/- 32 min (p = 0.032) and the amount of contrast used from 242 +/- 102 ml (culprit treatment group) to 341 +/- 163 ml (multivessel complete treatment), p = 0.025. A similar low incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events was observed in the 2 groups (0 and 3.8% in culprit and multivessel treatment groups, p = 0.164). The increase in the incidence of new revascularisation in the culprit treatment group at 12 month follow-up was not significant (35 vs 17%, p = 0.247) but was sufficient to compensate the initial higher in-hospital cost, with a similar 12 month hospital cost in the 2 groups (Euro 22,330 +/- Euro 13,653 vs Euro 20,382 +/- Euro 11,671, p = 0.231).Multivessel treatment during primary PTCA was safe in this controlled trial. However, when only the culprit lesion was initially treated, the need for subsequent clinically driven revascularization remained low and no clinical or economical advantages were obtainable with a more aggressive initial approach. In clinical practice, a staged approach to multivessel treatment during primary angioplasty avoids to treat unnecessarily non clinically relevant lesions.

Oral Rapamycin to Reduce Intimal Hyperplasia After Bare Metal Stent Implantation - A Prospective Randomized Intravascular Ultrasound Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this trial was to compare cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) with conventional balloon angioplasty (i.e., percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty [PTCA]) for the treatment of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR).BackgroundRetrospective studies suggest CBA might be superior to conventional PTCA in the treatment of ISR.MethodsThe Restenosis Cutting Balloon Evaluation Trial (RESCUT) is a multicenter, randomized, prospective European trial including 428 patients with all types of ISR (e.g., focal, multifocal, diffuse, proliferative).ResultsIn both groups, the majority of ISR lesions were shorter than 20 mm. The length of restenotic stents was similar (CBA: 18.6 ± 9.7 mm; PTCA: 18.3 ± 8.7 mm). The number of balloons used to treat ISR was lower in the CBA group: only one balloon was used in 82.3% of CBA cases, compared with 75% of PTCA procedures (p = 0.03). Balloon slippage was less frequent in the CBA group (CBA 6.5%, PTCA 25%; p < 0.01). There was a trend toward a lower need for additional stenting in the CBA group (CBA 3.9%, PTCA 8.0%; p = 0.07). At seven-month angiographic follow-up, the binary restenosis rate was not different between the groups (CBA 29.8%, PTCA 31.4%; p = 0.82), with a similar pattern of recurrent restenosis. Clinical events at seven months were also similar.ConclusionsCutting balloon angioplasty did not reduce recurrent ISR and major adverse cardiac events, as compared with conventional PTCA. However, CBA was associated with some procedural advantages, such as use of fewer balloons, less requirement for additional stenting, and a lower incidence of balloon slippage.