Key result
Single-layer PTFE-covered stents show no significant mortality difference vs polyurethane-covered stents for coronary perforation.
Why the study?
Coronary perforation during PCI is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and long-term outcomes after PTFE-covered stent deployment for this complication are not well defined.
Cohort (n=170)
Yes
Hazard Ratio: 0.39 (95% CI 0.1–1.1)
Absolute Event Rate: 6.8% vs 19%
p-value: p=0.068
May support new-generation PTFE stents in perforation; leaves open randomized confirmation of equivalence.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term outcomes for patients receiving polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered stents as definitive therapy, in our institution, for the management of acute coronary perforation. BACKGROUND: Coronary perforation as a complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Management options included observation only or a combination of several or all of these approaches: reversal of anticoagulation, prolonged balloon inflation, deployment of a standard stent, emergent cardiac surgery, or insertion of a PTFE-covered stent. METHODS: With our IRB approval, records of 12,093 consecutive patients who received PCI during a 5-year period from January 2002 to December 2006 were reviewed and 50 patients who had coronary perforation as a complication of PCI were identified. RESULTS: Of the 21 patients who received a PTFE-covered stent to manage coronary perforation, one died secondary to acute thrombosis within the PTFE-covered stent in the first 24 hrs and one required emergent cardiac surgery due to continued contrast extravasation despite PTFE-covered stent deployment. The other 19 patients were followed long term (mean 55 months) and only one survivor had a potentially life-threatening outcome (subacute stent thrombosis) over that time period. CONCLUSION: Utilization of a PTFE-covered stent may be a reasonable short- and long-term option to manage acute coronary perforation that occurs during PCI. On the basis of this limited experience, successful PTFE-covered stent deployment as the conclusive treatment for coronary perforation is associated with a favorable long-term event-free survival rate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Copeland et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention (n=170). Single-layer polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered stent vs. Single-layer polyurethane (PU)-covered stent was evaluated on All-cause mortality at 12 months (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.1-1.1, p=0.068). New-generation single-layer PTFE-covered stents were associated with comparable high procedural success and no statistically significant difference in 12-month all-cause mortality compared to polyurethane-covered stents for treating acute coronary perforation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: