Why the study?
Does the flexible MedStent provide safety and low late angiographic restenosis in patients with stable or unstable angina and discrete de novo native coronary lesions?
Does the flexible MedStent provide safety and low late angiographic restenosis in patients with stable or unstable angina and discrete de novo native coronary lesions?
The flexible MedStent demonstrated a high procedural success rate (99.1%), low 1-year target vessel revascularization rate (10.3%), and favorable 6-month angiographic restenosis (20.0%) in patients with discrete de novo native coronary lesions.
Supports feasibility in discrete lesions; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation versus contemporary stents.
The use of enhanced designs of new coronary stents continues to expand the spectrum of coronary anatomy and clinical settings amenable to nonsurgical revascularization. The objectives of this clinical trial were to demonstrate the safety and late angiographic restenosis rate of the new flexible MedStent. The study included 117 patients with stable or unstable angina pectoris and a discrete de novo lesion of a native coronary artery. Procedural success, 6-month angiographic findings, and 1-year clinical outcomes were determined. The stent was successfully deployed in all but one patient (99.1%). There were no events in any of the patients within the first 2 weeks after the procedure. At 1 year, a total of 12 patients had 16 clinical events related to the stented artery (1 death, 3 non-Q-wave MIs, 10 repeat PTCAs, and 2 CABG procedures). This represents a target vessel revascularization rate (TVR) of 10.3%. The minimal luminal diameter (MLD) at 6 months for the MedStent was 2.04 +/- 0.71 mm. The 6-month binary angiographic restenosis was 20.0% (95% CI, 12.5%-27.5%). The results of the Medstent study in discrete, de novo native coronary lesions demonstrated low incidence of clinical events as well as favorable angiographic restenosis rate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Segev et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: