Adamian M, Colombo A, Briguori C, Nishida T, Marsico F, Di Mario C, Albiero R, Moussa I, Moses J W
Lenox Hill Heart and Vascular Institute, New York, New York, USA.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001 Sep;38(3):672-9. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01458-9.
The purpose of the study was to determine whether cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) has advantages over other modalities in treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR).
Controversies exist regarding optimal treatment for ISR. Recently, CBA emerged as a tool in management of ISR.
A total of 648 lesions treated for ISR were divided into four groups according to the treatment strategy: CBA, rotational atherectomy (ROTA), additional stenting (STENT), and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). Following the matching process, 258 lesions were entered into the analysis.
Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar among the groups (p = NS). Acute lumen gain was significantly higher in the STENT group (2.12 +/- 0.7 mm), whereas in the CBA group the gain was similar to one achieved following ROTA and following PTCA (1.70 +/- 0.6 vs. 1.79 +/- 0.5 mm and 1.56 +/- 0.7 mm, respectively; p = NS). The lumen loss at follow-up was lower for the CBA versus ROTA and versus STENT (0.63 +/- 0.6 vs. 1.30 +/- 0.8 mm and 1.36 +/- 0.8 mm, respectively; p < 0.0001), yielding a lower recurrent restenosis rate (20% vs. 35.9% and 41.4%, respectively; p < 0.05). By multivariate analysis, CBA (odds ratio [OR] = 0.17; confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.51; p = 0.001) and diffuse restenosis type at baseline (OR = 2.07; CI, 1.15 to 3.71; p = 0.02) were identified as predictors of target lesion revascularization.
We conclude that CBA is a safe and efficient technique for treatment of ISR, with immediate results similar to atheroablation and better clinical and angiographic outcomes at follow-up. This approach might be implemented as a viable option in management of focal ISR and to prepare diffuse ISR for brachytherapy treatment.
本研究旨在确定切割球囊血管成形术(CBA)在治疗支架内再狭窄(ISR)方面是否比其他方法具有优势。
关于ISR的最佳治疗方法存在争议。最近,CBA成为治疗ISR的一种手段。
根据治疗策略,将总共648例接受ISR治疗的病变分为四组:CBA组、旋磨术(ROTA)组、再次置入支架(STENT)组和经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术(PTCA)组。经过匹配过程后,258例病变进入分析。
各组间基线临床和血管造影特征相似(p = 无显著差异)。STENT组的急性管腔增加显著更高(2.12±0.7 mm),而CBA组的增加与ROTA组和PTCA组之后的增加相似(分别为1.70±0.6 vs. 1.79±0.5 mm和1.56±0.7 mm;p = 无显著差异)。随访时,CBA组的管腔丢失低于ROTA组和STENT组(分别为0.63±0.6 vs. 1.30±0.8 mm和1.36±0.8 mm;p < 0.0001),导致复发再狭窄率更低(分别为20% vs. 35.9%和41.4%;p < 0.05)。通过多变量分析,CBA(比值比[OR] = 0.17;置信区间[CI],0.06至0.51;p = 0.001)和基线时弥漫性再狭窄类型(OR = 2.07;CI,1.15至3.71;p = 0.02)被确定为靶病变血运重建的预测因素。
我们得出结论,CBA是治疗ISR的一种安全有效的技术,其即刻效果与斑块旋切术相似,随访时临床和血管造影结果更好。这种方法可作为治疗局限性ISR的一种可行选择,并为弥漫性ISR的近距离放射治疗做准备。