| 1. |
- Venetsanos, D., et al.
(author)
-
Utilization and outcomes of rotational atherectomy in Sweden
- 2020
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 41:Suppl. 2, s. 2528-2528
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Aim: To evaluate utilization and outcomes of rotational atherectomy (RA) using data from the Swedish Coronary and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR).Methods: We included 1476 patients with 2218 lesions who underwent RA from 2005 to 2016. To study temporal changes, the study period was divided into three equal time-periods, period A, B and C.Results: Although the number of RA procedures increased 3-fold from 2005 to 2016, the rate of RA (of all PCI procedures) remained low (0.5% vs 1.2% in 2005 vs 2016). RA patients consisted a high-risk group, with advanced age and clustering of comorbidities. Over time, included patients were older and had a higher risk profile. Trans-radial access, drug eluting stent (DES) use and use of intravascular imaging significantly increased from period A to C whereas positioning of a temporary pacemaker or intra-aortic balloon pump declined. Unfractionated heparin became the main anticoagulant (52 vs 87%) and use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors declined (31 vs 12%, in period A vs C). Following RA, 11% of lesions were treated without stent (15 vs 15 vs 8%, in period A, B and C) (Rota-only). In lesions treated with a stent, a bare metal stent (BMS) was implanted in 39% vs 12% vs 2% and a new generation DES (N-DES) in 5 vs 75 vs 97% (period A vs B vs C) of lesions.The 3-year cumulative rate of restenosis was 6.7% (122 events), (11.1 vs 7.1 vs 4.1% in period A vs B vs C). As compared to DES, rota-only (adjusted HR 2.71; 95% CI 1.69- 4.36) and BMS (adjusted HR 3.63; 95% CI 2.27- 5.81) were associated with significantly higher risk for restenosis. First generation DES were associated with numerically higher but not significantly different risk for restenosis as compared to N-DES (adjusted HR 1.31; 95% CI 0.74- 2.31).The 3 year cumulative rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including death, myocardial infarction (MI) or any restenosis was 30.6% (34.2 vs 31.4 vs 28.2%, in period A vs B vs C) and the corresponding numbers for all-cause mortality were 18.1% (18.9 vs 18.4 vs 17.0%). After adjustment for baseline characteristics and angiographic findings, RA in period A was associated with higher risk for MACE as compared to period C (adjusted HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.09- 1.79), due to higher risk for MI and restenosis. The difference disappeared when procedural characteristics, including DES use, were added to the model.The rate of major in-hospital complications was 7.0%, including in-hospital death 1.3%, periprocedural MI 2.8%, perforation 1.1%, cardiac tamponade 0.7%, stroke 0.2% and major bleedings 2.1%. We found no significant differences over time.Conclusion: During the studied period, RA remained a rare procedure, utilised in a highly selected population. Over time a declining rate of restenosis and MI after RA was observed, a finding that appeared to be mainly driven by an increased use of DES. The rate of major in-hospital complication remained low.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Andell, P., et al.
(author)
-
Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone
- 2017
-
In: Circulation-Cardiovascular Interventions. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1941-7640 .- 1941-7632. ; 10:5
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Small observational studies have indicated better outcome with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance when performing unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but the overall picture remains inconclusive and warrants further investigation. We studied the impact of IVUS guidance on outcome in patients undergoing unprotected LMCA PCI in a Swedish nationwide observational study. Methods and Results Patients who underwent unprotected LMCA PCI between 2005 and 2014 because of stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome were included from the nationwide SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry). Of 2468 patients, IVUS guidance was used in 621 (25.2%). The IVUS group was younger (median age, 70 versus 75 years) and had fewer comorbidities but more complex lesions. IVUS was associated with larger stent diameters (median, 4 mm versus 3.5 mm). After adjusting for potential confounders, IVUS was associated with significantly lower occurrence of the primary composite end point of all-cause mortality, restenosis, or definite stent thrombosis (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.84) and all-cause mortality alone (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.82). In 340 propensity score-matched pairs, IVUS was also associated with significantly lower occurrence of the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.80). Conclusions IVUS was associated with an independent and significant outcome benefit when performing unprotected LMCA PCI. Potential mediators of this benefit include larger and more appropriately sized stents, perhaps translating into lower risk of subsequent stent thrombosis. Although residual confounding cannot be ruled out, our findings indicate a possible hazard when performing unprotected LMCA PCI without IVUS guidance.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Volz, S., et al.
(author)
-
Long-term survival in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with or without intracoronary pressure wire guidance : a report from SCAAR
- 2020
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 41:Suppl. 2, s. 2507-2507
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Background: Intracoronary pressure wire measurements of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) provide decision-making guidance during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, limited data exist on the impact of FFR/iFR on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with stable angina, unstable angina (UA)/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), or STEMI.Methods: We used data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) on all patients in Sweden undergoing PCI (with or without FFR/iFR guidance) for stable angina, UA/NSTEMI, or STEMI between January 2005 and March 2018. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and the secondary endpoints were stent thrombosis or restenosis and periprocedural complications. The primary model was multilevel Cox proportional-hazards regression using an instrumental variable (IV) to adjust for known and unknown confounders with treating hospital as a treatment-preference instrument. The following variables were entered into Cox proportional-hazards regression in addition to the IV: age, sex, diabetes, indication for PCI, severity of coronary disease, smoking status, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI, previous coronary artery bypass graft, type of stent.Results: In total, 151,001 patients underwent PCI: 31,514 (20.9%) for stable angina, 74,982 (49.6%) for UA/NSTEMI, and 44,505 (29.5%) for STEMI. Of these, FFR/iFR guidance was used in 11,433 patients (7.6%): 5029 (44.0%) with stable angina, 5989 (52.4%) with UA/NSTEMI, and 415 (3.6%) with STEMI; iFR was used in 1156 (10.1%) of these patients. After a median follow-up of 1784 (range 1–4824) days, the FFR/iFR group had lower adjusted risk estimates for all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69–0.91; P=0.001] and stent thrombosis and restenosis (HR 0.13; 95% CI 0.09–0.19; P<0.001). The number of periprocedural complications did not differ significantly between the groups (odds ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.30–1.55; P=0.368). There was no interaction between FFR/iFR and indication for PCI. We found no difference between FFR and iFR (HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.90–1.59; P=0.216).Conclusions: In this observational study, the use of FFR/IFR was associated with a lower risk of long-term mortality in patients undergoing PCI for stable angina, UA/NSTEMI, or STEMI. Our study supports the current European and American guidelines for the use of FFR/iFR during PCI and shows that intracoronary pressure wire guidance has prognostic benefit in patients with stable angina as well as in patients with the acute coronary syndrome.
|
|
