Sareen Nishtha, Baber Usman, Aquino Melissa, Sayseng Sonny, Sweeny Joseph, Barman Nitin, Kapur Vishal, Kini Annapoorna, Sharma Samin K
Department of Cardiology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York.
J Interv Cardiol. 2017 Aug;30(4):331-337. doi: 10.1111/joic.12398. Epub 2017 Jun 27.
To compare clinical and safety endpoints with use of rotational (RA) and orbital (OA) atherectomy in a large patient population with moderate to severely calcified lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Coronary artery calcification (CAC) has been recognized as a risk factor for adverse outcomes with coronary artery disease (CAD). Though atheroablative techniques, RA and OA have been used extensively, comparison of their clinical and safety endpoints is lacking. Comparison of these two modalities formed the basis of our study.
Of 12 001 patients who underwent PCI at our institution between January 2013-December 2015, we studied 998 consecutive patients with severe calcification treated with atheroablation. We assessed clinical outcomes including death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 30 days and 6 months in addition to post-procedural complications. Device perforation occurred more frequently with use of OA at high burr speed versus RA (1.9%, n = 3 vs. 0.2%, n = 2, P = 0.03). Rates of composite adverse events were similar between groups at 6 months (18.55 vs. 11.46%; P = 0.11) CONCLUSION: In this retrospective, single center study, we observed no significant differences in 6-month rates of adverse events associated with use of OA vs. RA in patients with moderate to severe calcification undergoing PCI. Larger, prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings.
在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的大量中重度钙化病变患者中,比较使用旋磨术(RA)和轨道旋切术(OA)的临床和安全性终点。
冠状动脉钙化(CAC)已被认为是冠状动脉疾病(CAD)不良预后的危险因素。尽管旋磨术和轨道旋切术等斑块消融技术已被广泛应用,但缺乏对其临床和安全性终点的比较。这两种方式的比较构成了我们研究的基础。
在2013年1月至2015年12月期间于我院接受PCI的12001例患者中,我们研究了998例接受斑块消融治疗的严重钙化连续患者。除了术后并发症外,我们评估了30天和6个月时的临床结局,包括死亡、心肌梗死(MI)和靶病变血运重建(TLR)。与RA相比,在高磨头速度下使用OA时器械穿孔更频繁发生(1.9%,n = 3 vs. 0.2%,n = 2,P = 0.03)。6个月时两组的复合不良事件发生率相似(18.55% vs. 11.46%;P = 0.11)。结论:在这项回顾性单中心研究中,我们观察到在接受PCI的中重度钙化患者中,使用OA与RA的6个月不良事件发生率无显著差异。需要更大规模的前瞻性研究来证实我们的发现。