Gabrielli Roberto, Rosati Maria Sofia, Chiappa Roberto, Millarelli Massimiliano, Marcuccio Luigi, Siani Andrea, Caselli Giovanni
Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, "Policlinico Casilino," Rome, Italy.
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015 Mar;63(2):158-63. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1396898. Epub 2015 Jan 20.
To evaluate outcomes of superficial femoral artery (SFA) stenting with Boston Scientific Innova stent system (Boston Scientific Corporation Place, Natick, Massachusetts, United States) compared with ev3 Protege stent system (Endovascular, Inc., Plymouth, Minnesota, United States) in terms of safety and effectiveness and to identify factors predictive of restenosis.
From March 2012 to January 2013, 71 patients with SFA TASC (Trans Atlantic Inter-Societal Consensus)-II B and C occlusive lesions were treated by percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with stenting (30 patients in the Innova group and 41 cases in the Protege group) and were evaluated by retrospective observational data analysis. Chi-square tests for categorical data and time to event provided two-sided p values with a level of significance at 0.05 and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Survival curves for primary patency were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate analysis for diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, smoking, hypertension, and critical limb ischemia was performed according to the Cox proportional hazards model.
The mean follow-up was 14 months (range 1-18 months). The occlusive lesions treated were ≤15 cm in length. The 12-month primary patency rate was significantly higher in the Protege group (81.5%; 31/38) than the Innova group (43.3%; 13/30; hazard ratio [HR] 3.0; 95% CI: 1.38-6.8; p = 0.005. The secondary patency was similar to the primary comparison data and showed a significant advantage for the Protege stent (HR 2.9; 95% CI: 1.21-6.99; p = 0.01). Univariate analysis demonstrated that diabetes and smoking were significantly related to patency failure in both groups.
SFA stenting is generally a safe procedure, but the effectiveness and patency rates are significantly lower for Innova than Protege. Furthermore, preoperative diabetes and smoking continue to be associated with low primary patency rate. These preliminary data suggest that Innova stent is not the treatment of choice for SFA lesions.
为了评估使用波士顿科学公司(位于美国马萨诸塞州纳蒂克)的Innova支架系统与ev3公司(位于美国明尼苏达州普利茅斯)的Protege支架系统进行股浅动脉(SFA)支架置入术在安全性和有效性方面的结果,并确定预测再狭窄的因素。
2012年3月至2013年1月,71例患有SFA跨大西洋跨学会共识(TASC)-II B级和C级闭塞性病变的患者接受了经皮腔内血管成形术加支架置入术(Innova组30例患者,Protege组41例患者),并通过回顾性观察数据分析进行评估。对分类数据和事件发生时间进行卡方检验,提供双侧p值,显著性水平为0.05,置信区间(CI)为95%。使用Kaplan-Meier方法绘制主要通畅率的生存曲线。根据Cox比例风险模型对糖尿病、高胆固醇血症、吸烟、高血压和严重肢体缺血进行单因素分析。
平均随访时间为14个月(范围1-18个月)。所治疗的闭塞性病变长度≤15 cm。Protege组的12个月主要通畅率(81.5%;31/38)显著高于Innova组(43.3%;13/30;风险比[HR] 3.0;95% CI:1.38-6.8;p = 0.005)。次要通畅率与主要比较数据相似,Protege支架显示出显著优势(HR 2.9;95% CI:1.21-6.99;p = 0.01)。单因素分析表明,糖尿病和吸烟在两组中均与通畅失败显著相关。
SFA支架置入术一般是一种安全的手术,但Innova支架的有效性和通畅率显著低于Protege支架。此外,术前糖尿病和吸烟仍然与低主要通畅率相关。这些初步数据表明,Innova支架不是SFA病变的首选治疗方法。