AUTOPERFUSION BALLOON VERSUS STENT FOR ACUTE OR THREATENED CLOSURE DURING PERCUTANEOUS TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY

ED DEMUINCK*, P DENHEIJER, RB VANDIJK, HJGM CRIJNS, HJ HILLEGE, SP TWISK, KI LIE

*Bijbehorende auteur voor dit werk

OnderzoeksoutputAcademicpeer review

28 Citaten (Scopus)

Samenvatting

Efficacy and major clinical end points were compared in 61 patients treated with a Stack autoperfusion balloon versus 36 patients who received a Palmaz-Schatz stent for acute or threatened closure during coronary angioplasty. The groups were comparable regarding baseline clinical characteristics. Procedural success was achieved in 43 patients (70%) treated with an autoperfusion balloon versus 34 patients (94%) who received a stent (p 50%) occurred in 13 patients with autoperfusion (30%) versus 3 patients with stents (12%) (p = NS). There was no difference in event-free survival during follow-up. Thus, both interventions were equally successful in the treatment of acute and threatened closure. More emergency surgery was performed in the autoperfusion balloon group, whereas a higher subacute reclosure rate was seen in the stent group. At 3-month follow-up, there were no significant differences regarding reclosure, restenosis, and event-free survival.

Originele taal-2English
Pagina's (van-tot)1002-1005
Aantal pagina's4
TijdschriftAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume74
Nummer van het tijdschrift10
StatusPublished - 15-nov-1994

Citeer dit