Randomized comparison of coronary stenting with optimal balloon angioplasty for treatment of lesions in small coronary arteries.

AIMS Angioplasty of lesions in small coronary arteries remains a significant problem because of the increased risk of restenosis. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of elective coronary stent placement and optimal balloon angioplasty in small vessel disease. METHODS One hundred and twenty patients with lesions in small coronary arteries (de novo, non-ostial lesion and reference diameter <3 mm) were randomly assigned to either balloon angioplasty or elective stent placement (7-cell NIR stent). The primary end-point was restenosis at 6 months follow-up. Optimal balloon angioplasty was defined as diameter stenosis less than or = 30% and the absence of major dissection after the angioplasty, and crossover to stenting was allowed. RESULTS Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the two groups. Procedure was successful in all patients, and in-hospital events did not occur in any patient. However, 12 patients in the angioplasty group were stented because of suboptimal results or major dissection. Postprocedural lumen diameter was significantly larger in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (2.44 +/- 0.36 mm vs 2.14 +/- 0.36, P<0.05, respectively), but late loss was greater in the stent group (1.12 +/- 0.67 mm vs 0.63 +/- 0.48, P<0.01, respectively). The angiographic restenosis rate was 30.9% in the angioplasty group, and 35.7% in the stent group (P = ns). Clinical follow-up was available in all patients (15.9 +/- 5.7 months) and clinical events during the follow-up were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that optimal balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting may be a reasonable approach for treatment of lesions in small coronary arteries.

[1]  C. Di Mario,et al.  Angiographic and clinical outcome following coronary stenting of small vessels: a comparison with coronary stenting of large vessels. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  M. Leon,et al.  Intimal hyperplasia thickness at follow-up is independent of stent size: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. , 1998, The American journal of cardiology.

[3]  M. Hadamitzky,et al.  Vessel size and long-term outcome after coronary stent placement. , 1998, Circulation.

[4]  R E Vlietstra,et al.  ACC Expert Consensus document on coronary artery stents. Document of the American College of Cardiology. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  A. Cribier,et al.  Primary stenting of de novo lesions in small coronary arteries: a prospective, pilot study. , 1998, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[6]  L. Harrell,et al.  Optimal coronary balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting versus primary stent (OCBAS): immediate and long-term follow-up results. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  E. Topol,et al.  A call for provisional stenting: the balloon is back! , 1998, Circulation.

[8]  J. Moses,et al.  Efficacy of coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in small coronary arteries. Stent Restenosis Study (STRESS) Investigators. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  P. Serruys,et al.  Influence of Coronary Vessel Size on Renarrowing Process and Late Angiographic Outcome After Successful Balloon Angioplast , 1994, Circulation.

[10]  W Rutsch,et al.  A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  M. Mooney,et al.  Use of a morphologic classification to predict clinical outcome after dissection from coronary angioplasty. , 1991, The American journal of cardiology.

[12]  P. Teirstein,et al.  A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.