Key result
Rotational burr atherectomy was associated with a lower rate of angiographic ostial restenosis compared to transluminal extraction atherectomy (39.1% vs 65.9%, P<0.05).
Why the study?
Do rotational burr and transluminal extraction atherectomy provide high procedural success and low restenosis rates in patients with ostial stenoses?
Population
101 patients with coronary artery and saphenous vein graft ostial stenoses
Comparison
Rotational burr atherectomy or transluminal… vs Compared to each other
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
May support rotational atherectomy for ostial lesions; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
Cohort (n=101)
Do rotational burr and transluminal extraction atherectomy provide high procedural success and low restenosis rates in patients with ostial stenoses?
Absolute Event Rate: 39.1% vs 65.9%
p-value: p=<0.05
Both rotational and extraction atherectomy for ostial stenoses yield high procedural success and low complications, but are limited by high rates of angiographic restenosis, particularly in saphenous vein grafts.
Koller et al. (1994) conducted a cohort in Ostial stenoses of coronary artery and saphenous vein grafts (n=101). Rotational burr atherectomy vs. Transluminal extraction atherectomy was evaluated on Angiographic ostial restenosis (p=<0.05). Rotational burr atherectomy was associated with a lower rate of angiographic ostial restenosis compared to transluminal extraction atherectomy (39.1% vs 65.9%, P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: