Randomised comparison of micro stent I with Palmaz-Schatz stent placement for the elective treatment of short coronary stenoses

✍ Scribed by Menafoglio, Andrea ;Eeckhout, Eric ;Debbas, Nadia ;Faivre, René ;Petiteau, Pierre-Yves ;Vogt, Pierre ;Stauffer, Jean-Christophe ;Goy, Jean-Jacques

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1998
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 38 KB
• Volume: 43
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0098-6569
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0304(199804)43:4<403::aid-ccd9>3.0.co;2-c

✦ Synopsis

This randomised trial compared the Micro Stent I and the Palmaz-Schatz stent for the elective treatment of short (F8 mm long), new-onset coronary stenoses. The primary endpoints were restenosis rate and minimal luminal diameter at 6 mo angiographic follow-up. The secondary endpoints were angiographic and procedural success of stenting and a composite clinical endpoint at 6 mo (death, myocardial infarction, and target site revascularisation). A total of 93 patients were randomised. Clinical and angiographic characteristics of the two groups were comparable. Angiographic success of stenting was 96% in both groups, and there were no complications so that the procedural success was also 96% in both groups. The restenosis rate was 29% for Micro Stent I and 27% for the Palmaz-Schatz stent (P ‫؍‬ NS). The minimal luminal diameter at 6 mo was 1.75 ؎ 0.72 mm in the Micro Stent I group and 1.84 ؎ 0.59 in the Palmaz-Schatz group (P ‫؍‬ NS). At 6 mo, a clinical endpoint was reached by 21% of the patients in the Micro Stent I group and by 11% in the Palmaz-Schatz group (P ‫؍‬ NS). In conclusion, the elective treatment of short coronary stenosis with the Micro Stent I or the Palmaz-Schatz stent resulted in similar early and late outcomes. In particular, the late angiographic results were very similar. Cathet.