4.4 Article

Optical Coherence Tomographic Observations of Polytetrafluoroethylene-Covered Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Arterial Stent

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 111, 期 8, 页码 1117-1122

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.12.036

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to evaluate neointimal coverage obtained using a new method of polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stent (PCS) implantation combined with underlying longer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation using optical coherence tomography. Nine patients were enrolled in this study, including patients with coronary artery perforations, original coronary aneurysms, and acquired coronary aneurysms after drug-eluting stent implantation. All patients were first treated with long SES implantation and then with focal PCS implantation. Postprocedural and follow-up angiographic and optical coherence tomographic examinations were performed in all patients, and intravascular ultrasound was performed in 5 patients. All patients were asymptomatic during follow-up, without recurrent angina. There was no stent-edge or stent-segment binary restenosis. Values of late loss for proximal SES segments, PCS segments, and distal SES segments were similar (0.09, 0.07, and 0.04 mm, respectively, p = 0.8113). The mean neointimal thickness of PCS was less than that of proximal and distal SES. However, no malapposed cross sections or uncovered cross sections were found in PCS segments compared with SES segments (p = 0.0011). In conclusion, the combination of PCS and underlying longer SES implantation can offer better angiographic follow-up results. High-resolution optical coherence tomography provided convincing proof of full neointimal coverage of PCS. This new method of combined PCS and SES implantation may be a better choice compared with direct PCS implantation in certain clinical settings. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2013;111:1117-1122)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据