首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine >One-stent versus two-stent techniques for distal unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions
【2h】

One-stent versus two-stent techniques for distal unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions

机译:单支架与两支架技术治疗远端未保护的左主冠状动脉分叉病变

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objective: To assess the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with single-stent versus double-stents implantation in distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) bifurcation lesions and evaluate their merits and demerits in this clinical setting. Methods: 88 patients with distal ULMCA bifurcation lesions and treated with PCI with single or double stents implantation (50 in the one-stent group and 38 in the two-stent group) was included. Results: No significant difference in the number of left main and multivessel disease, stenosis rate of left main, inner diameter of left main vessel, and distal bifurcation angle was noted. The procedural success rate was 100%. Single-stent group had significantly lower ostial residual stenosis of left anterior descending and higher ostial residual stenosis of left circumflex as compared to double-stent group. During the hospitalization period, no major adverse cardiovascular events were observed in the two groups. During the follow-up period, restenosis was observed in 1 case in single-stent group and in 2 cases in double-stent group, respectively. Recurrence of angina and target lesion revascularization was observed in 6 and 1 case in single-stent group, and 4 and 2 cases in double-stent group, respectively. There was no acute myocardial infarction, in-stent thrombosis and cardiac death in both of the groups. Conclusions: Both stenting strategies were feasible for distal ULMCA bifurcation lesions with a high operation success rate and safety. Single-stent technique had lower ostial residual stenosis of left anterior descending whereas double-stents technique had lower ostial residual stenosis of left circumflex.
机译:目的:评估在无保护的左主冠状动脉远端(ULMCA)分叉病变中单支架和双支架植入的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的临床效果,并评估其在这种临床环境中的优缺点。方法:纳入88例远端ULMCA分叉病变并采用单支架或双支架PCI治疗的患者(单支架组50例,双支架组38例)。结果:左主干和多支血管病变的数量,左主干狭窄率,左主血管内径和远端分叉角均无显着差异。手术成功率为100%。与双支架组相比,单支架组左前降支的眼部残余狭窄明显少,左旋支的左齿管残余狭窄更高。在住院期间,两组均未发现重大心血管不良事件。随访期间,单支架组观察到再狭窄1例,双支架组观察到2例再狭窄。单支架组分别有6例和1例,双支架组4例和2例观察到心绞痛复发和靶病变血运重建。两组均无急性心肌梗塞,支架内血栓形成和心源性死亡。结论:两种支架置入策略均适用于远端ULMCA分叉病变,手术成功率高,安全性高。单支架技术具有左前降支的较低的口腔残余狭窄,而双支架技术具有左旋支的较低的残余残余狭窄。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号