Key result
PTFE-covered stents seal 100% of coronary ruptures, linked to less tamponade and surgery vs. noncovered stents.
Why the study?
Coronary perforation is a life-threatening complication of percutaneous interventions, and the efficacy of PTFE-covered stents compared to noncovered stents for sealing ruptures after failed conservative treatment was unclear.
Does PTFE-covered stent implantation reduce the occurrence of cardiac tamponade and the need for emergency surgery in patients with coronary ruptures compared to noncovered stents?
Cohort (n=29)
Yes
Does PTFE-covered stent implantation reduce the occurrence of cardiac tamponade and the need for emergency surgery in patients with coronary ruptures compared to noncovered stents?
PTFE-covered stents provide an effective, life-saving percutaneous treatment for coronary ruptures that fail conservative management, significantly reducing the need for emergency surgery compared to bare-metal stents.
May reduce tamponade and surgery with PTFE-covered stents in ruptures; hypothesis-generating, needs randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Coronary perforation is a life-threatening complication of percutaneous interventions. In the past few years, the implantation of covered stents has emerged as a strategy for treatment when the traditional conservative approach (ie, prolonged balloon inflation and reversal of anticoagulation) fails. METHODS AND RESULTS: Since May 1997 (when polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE]-covered stents were available at our institutions), 11 of the 12 consecutive patients who had coronary ruptures that were unsuccessfully sealed with prolonged balloon inflation and reversal of anticoagulation were treated with 12 PTFE-covered stents (PTFE group). The efficacy of the PTFE-covered stent was compared with that of noncovered stents, which were used to treat 17 perforations (non-PTFE group). One patient sustained a very distal perforation that was not suitable for covered stent sealing and underwent emergency surgery. All vessel ruptures treated with PTFE-covered stent implantation were successfully sealed. The time necessary to deploy the stent was 10+/-3 minutes (range, 4 to 15 minutes). All patients but one were discharged from the hospital and had an optimal early clinical outcome. One patient underwent emergency bypass surgery and died in the intensive care unit. The occurrence of cardiac tamponade and the necessity for emergency surgery was significantly lower in the PTFE group than in the non-PTFE group. At 14+/-4 months, the 10 discharged patients had not experienced any major adverse cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study supports the utility of the PTFE-covered stent for the nonsurgical treatment of vessel ruptures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Briguori et al. (2000) conducted a cohort in Coronary ruptures (n=29). PTFE-covered stent implantation vs. Noncovered stents was evaluated on Successful sealing of vessel ruptures, cardiac tamponade, and necessity for emergency surgery. Emergency implantation of PTFE-covered stents successfully sealed 100% of coronary ruptures and significantly reduced cardiac tamponade and emergency surgery compared to noncovered stents.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: