Alfonso F, Macaya C, Iñiguez A, Zarco P
Cardiopulmonary Department, Hospital Universitario San Carlos, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
Am Heart J. 1990 Feb;119(2 Pt 1):237-41. doi: 10.1016/s0002-8703(05)80010-9.
To determine whether any differences exist in results of treatment of restenosis with repeat angioplasty when the procedure is performed during diagnosis or, as an alternative, when it is performed as a separate elective procedure, we prospectively compared the outcome of 48 consecutive procedures (including 51 lesions) at the time of initial cardiac catheterization (group 1) with the outcome of 26 consecutive elective procedures (including 30 lesions) (group 2). Before control angiography was performed, the anatomic and procedural characteristics of the previous dilatation and the new symptomatic status were carefully reevaluated in all patients. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics including age, sex, ejection fraction, and number of diseased vessels in which repair was attempted were similar in both groups. Reasons for angioplasty were also similar with unstable angina being the most frequent indication: 29 (60%) in group 1 versus 13 (50%) in group 2. (p = NS). Morphology of the lesions was also similar, although longer lesions (greater than 12 mm) were dilated in group 2 (13 (43%) vs 10 (20%) in group 1; p less than 0.05). Angiographic success was achieved in 51 lesions (100%) in group 1 versus 28 (93%) in group 2 (p = NS). Primary angioplasty success (in the absence of major complications) was achieved in 46 (95%) procedures in group 1 versus 24 (92%) in group 2 (p = NS). Two patients in group 1 had a myocardial infarction, but there were no other major complications in either group. Preliminary data suggest that the outcome of repeat coronary angioplasty for restenosis is similar whether it is performed at the time of diagnostic catheterization or later on as an independent elective procedure.
为了确定重复血管成形术治疗再狭窄时,在诊断过程中进行该操作与作为单独的择期手术进行操作时,治疗结果是否存在差异,我们前瞻性地比较了首次心脏导管插入术时连续48例手术(包括51处病变)(第1组)与连续26例择期手术(包括30处病变)(第2组)的结果。在进行对照血管造影之前,对所有患者之前扩张的解剖和操作特征以及新的症状状态进行了仔细重新评估。两组的基线临床和血管造影特征,包括年龄、性别、射血分数以及尝试进行修复的病变血管数量均相似。血管成形术的原因也相似,不稳定型心绞痛是最常见的指征:第1组为29例(60%),第2组为13例(50%)。(p = 无统计学意义)。病变形态也相似,尽管第2组扩张的病变更长(大于12毫米)(第2组为13例(43%),第1组为10例(20%);p < 0.05)。第1组51处病变(100%)实现了血管造影成功,第2组为28处(93%)(p = 无统计学意义)。第1组46例手术(95%)实现了初次血管成形术成功(无重大并发症),第2组为24例(92%)(p = 无统计学意义)。第1组有2例患者发生心肌梗死,但两组均无其他重大并发症。初步数据表明,无论在诊断性导管插入术时进行还是稍后作为独立的择期手术进行,重复冠状动脉血管成形术治疗再狭窄的结果相似。