Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)


Balloon optimization versus stent study (BOSS): Provisional stenting and early recoil after balloon angioplasty
Dangas, G; Ambrose, JA; Rehman, D; Marmur, JD; Sharma, SK; Hemdal-Monsen, C; Sanborn, TA; Fischman, DL;
Mt Sinai Sch Med, Cardiac Catheterizat Lab, New York, NY USA Mt Sinai Sch Med New York NY USA diac Catheterizat Lab, New York, NY USA Westchester Cty Med Ctr, Westchester, NY USA Westchester Cty Med Ctr Westchester NY USA Med Ctr, Westchester, NY USA Thomas Jefferson Univ, Coll Med, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA Thomas Jefferson Univ Philadelphia PA USA 19107 hiladelphia, PA 19107 USA New York Hosp, New York, NY 10021 USA New York Hosp New York NY USA 10021New York Hosp, New York, NY 10021 USA
Titolo Testata:
fascicolo: 8, volume: 85, anno: 2000,
pagine: 957 - 961
Tipo documento:
Settore Disciplinare:
Clinical Medicine
Life Sciences
Indirizzi per estratti:
Indirizzo: Ambrose, JA St Vincents Hosp Med Ctr, 153 W 11th St, New York, NY 10011 USA St Vincents Hosp Med Ctr 153 W 11th St New York NY USA 10011 A
G. Dangas et al., "Balloon optimization versus stent study (BOSS): Provisional stenting and early recoil after balloon angioplasty", AM J CARD, 85(8), 2000, pp. 957-961


"Optimal" percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) may have alate restenosis rate similar to stenting. We sought to assess short- and long-term results of a provisional stenting/optimal PTCA approach compared with elective stenting in a prospective, randomized study. A total of 97 patients with discrete, de novo lesions in native coronary arteries greater than or equal to 3 mm in diameter were randomized 2:1 in PTCA with prolonged perfusion balloon inflation (n = 66) versus elective stenting (n = 31). Recoil after PTCA was assessed by routine delayed angiograms (5 and 20 minutes). Cross over to stent was allowed for an inadequate result; there was no on-line quantitative angiography. An independent core angiographic laboratory assessed all results and evaluated the adequacy of the subjective interpretation. Within the PTCA arm, there were 24 (36%) crossovers to stenting (5of 24 [21%] due to recoil), whereas 2 stents could not be delivered to thelesion and crossed over to PTCA. As assessed by quantitative angiography, baseline reference vessel diameters were similar between the PTCA and stentgroups. The immediate lumen diameter achieved with PTCA was smaller than that achieved with stenting (2.18 +/- 0.49 vs 2.44 +/- 0.38 mm, respectively, p = 0.01). There were no differences in angiographic results between elective and crossover stenting and there were no in-hospital complications in any patient. Target lesion revascularization at 8 months was 19% (n = 6) inthe elective stent arm versus 21% (n = 14) in the PTCA arm, p = NS; respective rates in PTCA alone and crossed over-to-stent subsets were 23% (n = 10) versus 17% (n = 4), p = NS. Angiographic restenosis was 47% after elective stenting versus 38% after PTCA (intention to treat), p = NS. By received treatment, it was 41% (11 of 27) in the group treated with the PTCA versus 33% (5 of 15) in the crossover-to-stent arm (p = NS). Thus, provisional stenting can be safely performed in the treatment of discrete, native de novo lesions. Early recoil after PTCA cannot be reliably assessed without quantitative angiography. (C) 2000 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 27/11/20 alle ore 16:06:38