What is better for predilatation in bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: a non-compliant or a compliant balloon?

被引:6
|
作者
Ozel, Erdem [1 ]
Tastan, Ahmet [1 ]
Ozturk, Ali [1 ]
Ozcan, Emin Evren [1 ]
Uyar, Samet [1 ]
Senarslan, Omer [1 ]
机构
[1] Sifa Univ, Dept Cardiol, 1800 Sok, TR-35540 Izmir, Turkey
关键词
bioresorbable vascular scaffold; predilatation; non-compliant balloon; compliant balloon; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; ABSORB COHORT B; APPROPRIATE DEPLOYMENT; STENT SYSTEM; FOLLOW-UP; TRIAL; MULTICENTER;
D O I
10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2015.6184
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: The bioresorbable vascular scaffold system (BVS) is a fully absorbable vascular treatment system. In this study, we aimed to compare the periprocedural effectiveness and long term results of non-compliant balloon (NCB) and compliant balloon (CB) systems, which are used for predilatation before BVS implantation. Methods: One hundred forty-six BVS-treated lesions from 119 patients were retrospectively analyzed in the study. Patients with acute coronary syndrome, stable angina and silent ischemia were included in the study. Lesions and patients were categorized into the NCB and CB groups according to the type of balloon used for predilatation. NCB was implemented on 72 lesions (59 patients) and CB was implemented on 74 lesions (60 patients). The two groups were compared on terms of procedural features and both in-hospital and 1-year clinical follow-up results. Chi-square and independent sample t test were performed for statistical analysis. Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of patient characteristics and lesion properties. The number of postdilated lesions was significantly higher in the CB group. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume were significantly lower in the NCB group. At follow-up, one patient had myocardial infarction in the CB group because of scaffold thrombosis and no mortality was observed. Conclusion: Predilatation with NCB before BVS implantation reduces the need for postdilatation. In addition, use of NCB reduces the procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume but had no effect on 1 year clinical follow-up results compared with CB.
引用
收藏
页码:244 / 249
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effect of non-compliant balloon postdilatation on magnesium-based bioresorbable vascular scaffolds
    Blachutzik, Florian
    Achenbach, Stephan
    Troebs, Monique
    Marwan, Mohamed
    Weissner, Melissa
    Nef, Holger
    Schlundt, Christian
    CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2019, 93 (02) : 202 - 207
  • [2] The use of semi-compliant versus non-compliant balloon systems for predilatation during the implantation of self-expandable transcatheter aortic valves Data from the VIenna CardioThOracic Aortic Valve RegistrY (VICTORY)
    Mach, Markus
    Szalkiewicz, Philipp
    Poschner, Thomas
    Hasan, Waseem
    Andreas, Martin
    Winkler, Bernhard
    Hasimbegovic, Ena
    Steinkellner, Theresia
    Strouhal, Andreas
    Adlbrecht, Christopher
    Delle-Karth, Georg
    Grabenwoeger, Martin
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, 2021, 51 (09)
  • [3] The use of a scoring balloon for optimal lesion preparation prior to bioresorbable scaffold implantation: a comparison with conventional balloon predilatation
    Miyazaki, Tadashi
    Latib, Azeem
    Ruparelia, Neil
    Kawamoto, Hiroyoshi
    Sato, Katsumasa
    Figini, Filippo
    Colombo, Antonio
    EUROINTERVENTION, 2016, 11 (14) : E1580 - E1588
  • [4] Direct bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Feasibility and midterm results
    Suarez de Lezo, Javier
    Martin, Pedro
    Mazuelos, Francisco
    Novoa, Jose
    Ojeda, Soledad
    Pan, Manuel
    Segura, Jose
    Hernandez, Enrique
    Romero, Miguel
    Melian, Francisco
    Medina, Alfonso
    de Lezo, Jose Suarez
    CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2016, 87 (05) : E173 - E182
  • [5] Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study
    Pradhan, Akshyaya
    Vishwakarma, Pravesh
    Bhandari, Monika
    Sethi, Rishi
    Chandra, Sharad
    Chaudhary, Gaurav
    Sharma, Akhil
    Perrone, Marco Alfonso
    Dwivedi, Sudhanshu
    Narain, Varun
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (23)
  • [6] Neoatherosclerosis 5 Years After Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation
    Moriyama, Noriaki
    Shishido, Koki
    Tanaka, Yutaka
    Yokota, Shohei
    Hayashi, Takahiro
    Miyashita, Hirokazu
    Koike, Tatsuya
    Yokoyama, Hiroaki
    Takada, Takuma
    Nishimoto, Takashi
    Ochiai, Tomoki
    Tobita, Kazuki
    Yamanaka, Futoshi
    Mizuno, Shingo
    Murakami, Masato
    Takahashi, Saeko
    Saito, Shigeru
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2018, 71 (17) : 1882 - 1893
  • [7] Effects of aggressive predilatation, sizing, and postdilatation strategy for coronary bioresorbable vascular scaffolds implantation
    Chen, Hsiang-Yao
    Huang, Wei-Chieh
    Teng, Hsin-, I
    Tsai, Chuan-Tsai
    Tsai, Yi-Lin
    Chuang, Ming-Ju
    Chen, Ying-Ying
    Lu, Tse-Min
    JOURNAL OF THE CHINESE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2022, 85 (05) : 543 - 548
  • [8] Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation To Whom and How?
    Sabate, Manel
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2017, 10 (18) : 1865 - 1866
  • [9] Optimal Predilatation Treatment Before Implantation of a Magmaris Bioresorbable Scaffold in Coronary Artery Stenosis: The OPTIMIS Trial
    Hansen, Kirstine Norregaard
    Troan, Jens
    Maehara, Akiko
    Noori, Manijeh
    Hougaard, Mikkel
    Ellert-Gregersen, Julia
    Veien, Karsten Tange
    Junker, Anders
    Hansen, Henrik Steen
    Lassen, Jens Flensted
    Jensen, Lisette Okkels
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2025, 18 (01)
  • [10] Expansion and Malapposition Characteristics After Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation
    Brown, Adam J.
    McCormick, Liam M.
    Braganza, Denise M.
    Bennett, Martin R.
    Hoole, Stephen P.
    West, Nick E. J.
    CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2014, 84 (01) : 37 - 45