de Ribamar Costa Jose, Mintz Gary S, Carlier Stéphane G, Costa Ricardo A, Fujii Kenichi, Sano Koichi, Kimura Masashi, Lui Joanna, Weisz Giora, Moussa Issam, Dangas George, Mehran Roxana, Lansky Alexandra J, Kreps Edward M, Collins Michael, Stone Gregg W, Moses Jeffrey W, Leon Martin B
Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, New York, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 2005 Jul 1;96(1):74-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.02.049.
We used intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to assess the accuracy of manufacturers' stent balloon compliance charts. Many interventional cardiologists rely on manufacturers' compliance charts to select stent size and optimize stent diameters according to inflation pressures during percutaneous procedures. We randomly selected 212 patients who had de novo coronary lesions that had been treated with a single, bare metal, > or =3.0-mm stent (Bx velocity, NIR, TETRA/PENTA, S660/S670/S7) under IVUS guidance. Cases of stent overlap and postdilatation with another balloon were excluded. Predicted stent diameters were derived from each manufacturer's compliance charts, and stent size and final maximal deployment pressures were derived from each physician's report. IVUS-measured minimum stent diameters (range 1.4 to 4.0 mm, mean 2.79 +/- 0.48) were smaller than predicted diameters (range 3.1 to 4.57 mm, mean 3.79 +/- 0.44). The ratio of IVUS to predicted diameters ranged from 44% to 97% (mean 74 +/- 10%). This finding was common to all 3 stent sizes: 74 +/- 12% for 3.0 mm, 73 +/- 9% for 3.5 mm, and 74 +/- 9% for 4.0-mm stents (p = 0.9). This finding was also common to all 4 stent manufacturers, 72 +/- 8% for Boston Scientific, 76 +/- 11% for Guidant, 73 +/- 9% for Cordis, and 74 +/- 11% for Medtronic (p = 0.13), and to different stent lengths. Only 3.8% of the stents achieved 90% of the predicted minimum stent diameters, and only 24.6% achieved 80% of the predicted minimum stent diameters. In conclusion, in human coronary arteries, minimal stent diameter measured by IVUS is significantly smaller than that predicted by in vitro compliance charts. These differences are independent of stent manufacturer, length, diameter, and deployment pressure.
我们使用血管内超声(IVUS)来评估制造商的支架球囊顺应性图表的准确性。许多介入心脏病专家在经皮手术过程中依靠制造商的顺应性图表来选择支架尺寸并根据膨胀压力优化支架直径。我们随机选择了212例患有新发冠状动脉病变的患者,这些患者在IVUS引导下接受了单个裸金属、直径≥3.0 mm的支架(Bx velocity、NIR、TETRA/PENTA、S660/S670/S7)治疗。排除了支架重叠和用另一个球囊进行后扩张的病例。预测的支架直径来自每个制造商的顺应性图表,支架尺寸和最终最大展开压力来自每位医生的报告。IVUS测量的最小支架直径(范围为1.4至4.0 mm,平均为2.79±0.48)小于预测直径(范围为3.1至4.57 mm,平均为3.79±0.44)。IVUS与预测直径的比值范围为44%至97%(平均为74±10%)。这一发现适用于所有3种支架尺寸:3.0 mm的为74±12%,3.5 mm的为73±9%,4.0 mm的支架为74±9%(p = 0.9)。这一发现对于所有4家支架制造商也很常见,波士顿科学公司为72±8%,Guidant为76±11%,Cordis为73±9%,美敦力为74±11%(p = 0.13),并且适用于不同的支架长度。只有3.8%的支架达到了预测最小支架直径的90%,只有24.6%的支架达到了预测最小支架直径的80%。总之,在人体冠状动脉中,IVUS测量的最小支架直径明显小于体外顺应性图表预测的直径。这些差异与支架制造商、长度、直径和展开压力无关。