Emergency endoluminal stenting for abrupt vessel closure following coronary angioplasty: a randomized comparison of the Wiktor and Palmaz-Schatz stents

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_93E2CD6A1A08
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Emergency endoluminal stenting for abrupt vessel closure following coronary angioplasty: a randomized comparison of the Wiktor and Palmaz-Schatz stents
Périodique
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis
Auteur(s)
Goy  J. J., Eeckhout  E., Stauffer  J. C., Vogt  P., Kappenberger  L.
ISSN
1522-1946
0098-6569 (Print)
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
02/1995
Volume
34
Numéro
2
Pages
128-32
Notes
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial --- Old month value: Feb
Résumé
In order to compare the efficacy of two different stent types in case of bailout stenting, 65 patients, with abrupt or threatened vessel closure following coronary angioplasty, were randomly assigned to either Wiktor (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, 33 patients) or Palmaz-Schatz (Johnson & Johnson Interventional, Warren, NJ, 32 patients) stent implantation. Stenting was technically feasible in all except one patient and immediately successful in reverting ischemia and vessel closure in 60 patients (92%). At hospital discharge, complication rates were comparable: early vessel closure, 18% (Wiktor) versus 13% (Palmaz-Schatz) (P = 0.53); any clinical event (such as death, myocardial infarction, and surgical revascularization): 18% (Wiktor) versus 22% (Palmaz-Schatz) (P = 0.71). At 6 months follow-up, these complication rates remained equal: restenosis, 38% (Wiktor) versus 27% (Palmaz-Schatz) (P = 0.42); any clinical and angiographic (vessel closure and restenosis) event: 45% (Wiktor) and 41% (Palmaz-Schatz) (P = 0.69). Baseline, direct postprocedural, and follow-up quantitative coronary analysis data were similar, with, however, an exception for the postprocedural residual stenosis [28% (24-32%) (Wiktor) and 21% (18-23%) (Palmaz-Schatz] (means and 95% confidence intervals). In conclusion, despite a discrete postprocedural angiographic benefit observed with the Palmaz-Schatz stent, the long-term clinical and angiographic outcome is similar in both treatment groups. The choice whether to implant a Wiktor or Palmaz-Schatz stent may probably be left to the discretion of the operator and his experience with one particular device.
Mots-clé
Aged Aneurysm, Dissecting/radiography/*therapy Angina Pectoris/radiography/therapy Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary/*instrumentation Coronary Aneurysm/radiography/*therapy Coronary Angiography Coronary Artery Bypass *Emergencies Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Male Middle Aged Myocardial Infarction/radiography/*therapy Recurrence Risk Factors *Stents Treatment Outcome
Pubmed
Web of science
Création de la notice
28/01/2008 10:51
Dernière modification de la notice
03/03/2018 19:36
Données d'usage