Background Implantation of either bare metal stent （BMS） or drug-eluting stent （DES） has been used in every day practice for patients with unprotected left main stenosis （UPLMS）. There are still a lack of data r...Background Implantation of either bare metal stent （BMS） or drug-eluting stent （DES） has been used in every day practice for patients with unprotected left main stenosis （UPLMS）. There are still a lack of data regading the subsequent results of UPLMS in-stent restenosis （ISR）. The present study aimed at determing the clinical outcome of UPLMS ISR patients after implantation of either BMS or DES.Methods Patients with UPLMS ISR after stenting were included. The primary endpoint was the cumulative major adverse cardiac events （MACE）, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction （Ml）, and target vessel revascularization （TVR）.Results UPLMS ISR rate was 14.8% （n=73, 15.7% after BMS, 14.5% for DES） after average of （3.89±2.01） years （range from 1 to 10.5 years） follow-up. Angiographic follow-up between 6-8 months was available in 85.3%. Of these,repeat percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） was used in 62 （84.9%） patients, with medicine only in 9 （12.4%） and coronary artery bypass graft （CABG） in 2 （2.7%）. Most repeat PCI patients were with unstable angina （87.0%）, and had decreased left ventricular ejection fraction （（42.58±5.12）%）, fewer focal/ostial left circumflex branch （LCX） lesions, in relative to medicine only group. After （31.9±23.3） months, the MACE, Ml, TVR and cardiac death were 31.5%, 1.4%, 24.1% and 8.2%, respectively. Definite and possible stent thrombosis occurred in 1 （1.4%） patient.Conclusions Medical therapy for asymptomatic isolated ostial LCX was safe. Repeat PCI for UPLMS ISR was associated with acceptable early and short-term clinical outcome. Further study was needed to elucidate the role of CABG in treating UPLMS ISR.展开更多
文摘Background Implantation of either bare metal stent （BMS） or drug-eluting stent （DES） has been used in every day practice for patients with unprotected left main stenosis （UPLMS）. There are still a lack of data regading the subsequent results of UPLMS in-stent restenosis （ISR）. The present study aimed at determing the clinical outcome of UPLMS ISR patients after implantation of either BMS or DES.Methods Patients with UPLMS ISR after stenting were included. The primary endpoint was the cumulative major adverse cardiac events （MACE）, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction （Ml）, and target vessel revascularization （TVR）.Results UPLMS ISR rate was 14.8% （n=73, 15.7% after BMS, 14.5% for DES） after average of （3.89±2.01） years （range from 1 to 10.5 years） follow-up. Angiographic follow-up between 6-8 months was available in 85.3%. Of these,repeat percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） was used in 62 （84.9%） patients, with medicine only in 9 （12.4%） and coronary artery bypass graft （CABG） in 2 （2.7%）. Most repeat PCI patients were with unstable angina （87.0%）, and had decreased left ventricular ejection fraction （（42.58±5.12）%）, fewer focal/ostial left circumflex branch （LCX） lesions, in relative to medicine only group. After （31.9±23.3） months, the MACE, Ml, TVR and cardiac death were 31.5%, 1.4%, 24.1% and 8.2%, respectively. Definite and possible stent thrombosis occurred in 1 （1.4%） patient.Conclusions Medical therapy for asymptomatic isolated ostial LCX was safe. Repeat PCI for UPLMS ISR was associated with acceptable early and short-term clinical outcome. Further study was needed to elucidate the role of CABG in treating UPLMS ISR.
