Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Comparison of three coronary stents: Clinical and angiographic outcome after elective placement in 134 consecutive patients

1994; Wiley; Volume: 33; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/ccd.1810330302

1097-0304

Andrew I. Maclsaac, Stephen G. Ellis, David W.M. Muller, Eric J. Topol, Patrick L. Whitlow,

Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics

Abstract One hundred and thirty‐four consecutive patients undergoing elective coronary stenting were studied to assess the relative performance of Palmaz‐Schatz (PS), Gianturco‐Roubin (GR), and Wiktor (W) stents. Eighty‐six percent of patients underwent follow‐up angiography. Initial and follow‐up angiograms were assessed by a central angiographic core laboratory. Attempts were made to place 81 Palmaz‐Schatz (PS) stents, 21 Giant‐urco‐Roubin (GR), and 32 Wiktor (W) stents. PS stents were less frequently successfully deployed (88% PS vs. 100% GR vs. 97% W; P = 0.03). The final percent stenosis was greater with the GR stent (32% GR vs. 14% PS vs. 19% W; P < 0.001). The restenosis rate was lower in the PS group (PS 48.2% vs. GR 66.7% and W 68.4%; P = 0.044). After accounting for the effect of prior restenosis ( P = 0.005) and saphenous vein site ( P = 0.006) in muitivariate testing, lesion severity at follow‐up was still less with the Palmaz‐Schatz stent ( P = 0.037). © Wiley‐Liss, Inc.