Search

BACKGROUND The aim of the study was to assess anatomical and procedural predictors of clinical and procedural failure of rotational atherectomy (RA) in an all-comers population.Methods and Results:A total of 534 consecutive patients who underwent RA were included in a double-center observational study. The primary composite endpoint consisted of: rota-wire introduction failure, burr-passage failure, periprocedural complications and procedure-related major adverse events. The second primary endpoint included rota-wire introduction failure and burr-passage failure. The primary endpoint occurred in 76 (14.2%) patients and the second primary endpoint occurred in 64 (12%) Periprocedural complications occurred in 23 (4.3%) and procedure-related adverse events in 23 (4.3%) patients. Multivariable analysis revealed angulation on lesion ≤90° (HR=2.18, 95% CI: 1.21-3.94, P=0.0096) and sequential lesion (HR=1.89, 95% CI: 1.01-3.54, P=0.046) as independent predictors of no clinical success of RA. Multivariable analysis revealed again that angulation on lesion ≤90° (HR=2.26, 95% CI: 1.16-4.40, P=0.02) and sequential lesion (HR=3.77, 95% CI: 1.64-8.69, P

Background Data regarding the efficacy of the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-designed drug-eluting stent (new-DES) vs. bare metal stent (BMS) of saphenous vein grafts (SVG) stenosis is scarce. The primary objective was to compare one-year clinical outcomes of PCI in stenosis of SVG using new-DES vs. BMS in a real-world population. Methods and results We carried out a multi-center registry comparing new-DES with BMS in all consecutive patients undergoing PCI of SVG. The primary composite endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1 year. This observation included 792 consecutive patients (mean age 69 ± 8.9y), treated with either new-DES (n = 379, 47.9%) or BMS (n = 413, 52.1%). Among patients treated with new-DES compared with BMS, there was a lower risk of MACCE (21.4% vs. 28.3%, HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.50–0.95, p = 0.025) as well as myocardial infarction (MI) (6.3% vs. 12.1%; HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30–0.82, p = 0.005) at 1 year. After propensity score adjustment, the similar, significant reduction in MACCE and MI was observed in favor of new-DES (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46–0.96, p = 0.030; and HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31–0.92, p = 0.020, respectively). Conclusion In patients undergoing PCI of SVG, the use of new-DES is associated with a reduced 1-year rate of MACCE and MI compared to BMS.

Background: Evidence concerning the efficacy of the embolic protection devices (EPDs) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is sparse. The study was designed to compare major cardiovascular events of all-comer population of SVG PCI with and without EPDs at one year of follow-up. Methods and results: A multi-center registry comparing PCI with and without EPDs in consecutive patients undergoing PCI of SVG. The group comprised 792 patients, among which 266 (33.6%) had myocardial infarction (MI). The primary composite endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) defined as death, MI, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stroke assessed at one year. After propensity score analysis, there were no differences in MACCE (21.9% vs. 23.9%, HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57&ndash, 1.45, p = 0.681, respectively) nor in secondary endpoints of death, MI, TVR, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stroke at one year in EPDs PCI group vs. no-EPDs PCI group. Similarly, there were no differences between groups in the study endpoints at 30 days follow-up. Conclusions: There were no clinical benefit for routine use of EPDs during SVG PCI in short and long-term follow-up. Further studies are warranted to explore the effect of individual types of EPDs on clinical outcomes.