Pulmonary thromboembolism and 'temporary' patent foramen ovalis: ischaemic stroke due to paradox embolism

n/

Immediate and long-term clinical and angiographic results from Wiktor stent treatment for true bifurcation narrowings.

From January 1996 to December 1998, 90 consecutive patients with true bifurcation lesions underwent percutaneous coronary angioplasty with Wiktor stent implantation in our centers. In 1 group (group I, n = 45), a simple approach (main vessel stenting and balloon angioplasty of the side branch) was pursued. In the other group (group II, n = 45), both the main vessel and the side branch were stented ("T" technique). There was no significant difference in clinical and angiographic characteristics between the 2 groups. Angiographic and procedural successes were 100% and 95.6%, respectively, in both groups. Angiographic results for the side branch were better in group II than in group I. In-hospital and long-term (12 month) major cardiac events were similar in the 2 groups. Target lesion revascularization was 15.5% in group I and 35.5% in group II (p = 0.12). In the main vessel, restenosis rate was 12.5% in group I and 25% in group II (p = 0.15). In the side branch, restenosis rate was 37.5% in group II and 12.5% in group I (p = <0.05; odds ratio 2.42; 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 6.26). Event-free probability at 12 months was 61% in group II and 80% in group I (p = 0.10). When dealing with true bifurcation lesions, a simple strategy is associated with a lower risk of restenosis in the side branch. In contrast, a complex approach does not appear to give any benefit in terms of early or long-term outcome or restenosis rate

A randomized comparison of the value of additional stenting after optimal balloon angioplasty for long coronary lesions: final results of the additional value of NIR stents for treatment of long coronary lesions (ADVANCE) study.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the clinical benefit of additional stent implantation after achieving an optimal result of balloon angioplasty (BA) in long coronary lesions (>20 mm). BACKGROUND: Long coronary lesions are associated with increased early complications and late restenosis after BA. Stenting improves the early outcome, but stent restenosis is also related to both lesion length and stent length. METHODS: A total of 437 patients with a single native lesion 20 to 50 mm in length were included and underwent BA, using long balloons matched to lesion length and vessel diameter (balloon/artery ratio 1.1) to achieve a diameter stenosis (DS) 50% DS. Patients in whom an optimal BA result was achieved were randomized to additional stenting (using NIR stents) or no stenting. The primary end point was freedom from major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at nine months, and core laboratory QCA was performed on serial angiograms. RESULTS: Bailout stenting was necessary in 149 patients (34%) and was associated with a significantly increased risk of peri-procedural infarction (p < 0.02). Among the 288 randomized patients, the mean lesion length was 27+/-9 mm, and the vessel diameter was 2.78+/-0.52 mm. The procedural success rate was 90% for the 143 patients assigned to BA alone (control group), as compared with 93% in the 145 patients assigned to additional stenting (stent group), which resulted in a superior early minimal lumen diameter (0.54 mm, p < 0.001) and led to reduced angiographic restenosis (27% vs. 42%, p = 0.022). Freedom from MACE at nine months was 77% in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of provisional stenting for long coronary lesions led to bailout stenting in one-third of patients, with a threefold increase in peri-procedural infarction. Additional stenting yielded a lower angiographic restenosis rate, but no reduction in MACE at nine months

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Interventions Across the Entire Spectrum of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative appraisal of the effects on clinical outcomes of radial access for coronary interventions in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND Randomized trials investigating radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary interventions have provided conflicting evidence. No comprehensive quantitative appraisal of the risks and benefits of each approach is available across the whole spectrum of patients with stable or unstable CAD. METHODS The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized trials comparing radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a fixed-effects or a random-effects model, as appropriate. Pre-specified subgroup analyses according to clinical presentation, in terms of stable CAD, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were performed. RESULTS Twenty-four studies enrolling 22,843 participants were included. Compared with femoral access, radial access was associated with a significantly lower risk for all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 0.87; p = 0.001, number needed to treat to benefit [NNTB] = 160), major adverse cardiovascular events (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.94; p = 0.002; NNTB = 99), major bleeding (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.65; p < 0.001; NNTB = 103), and major vascular complications (OR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.35; p < 0.001; NNTB = 117). The rates of myocardial infarction or stroke were similar in the 2 groups. Effects of radial access were consistent across the whole spectrum of patients with CAD for all appraised endpoints. CONCLUSIONS Compared with femoral access, radial access reduces mortality and MACE and improves safety, with reductions in major bleeding and vascular complications across the whole spectrum of patients with CAD