Title of article :
Meta-Analysis of randomized trials of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus atherectomy, cutting balloon atherotomy, or laser angioplasty Original Research Article
Author/Authors :
John A. Bittl، نويسنده , , Derek P. Chew، نويسنده , , Eric J. Topol، نويسنده , , David F. Kong، نويسنده , , Robert M. Califf، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2004
Abstract :
Objectives
We conducted a systematic overview (meta-analysis) of randomized trials of balloon angioplasty versus coronary atherectomy, laser angioplasty, or cutting balloon atherotomy to evaluate the effects of plaque modification during percutaneous coronary intervention.
Background
Several mechanical approaches have been developed that ablate or section atheromatous plaque during percutaneous coronary interventions to optimize acute results, minimize intimal injury, and reduce complications and restenosis.
Methods
Sixteen trials (9,222 patients) constitute the randomized controlled experience with atherectomy, laser, or atherotomy versus balloon angioplasty with or without coronary stenting. Each trial tested the hypothesis that ablative therapy would result in better clinical or angiographic results than balloon dilation alone.
Results
Short-term death rates (<31 days) were not improved by the use of ablative procedures (0.3% vs. 0.4%, odds ratio [OR] 0.94 [95% confidence interval 0.46 to 1.92]), but periprocedural myocardial infarctions (4.4% vs. 2.5%, OR 1.83 [95% CI 1.43 to 2.34]) and major adverse cardiac events (5.1% vs. 3.3%, OR 1.54 [95% CI 1.25 to 1.89]) were increased. Angiographic restenosis rates (6,958 patients) were not improved with the ablative devices (38.9% vs. 37.4%, OR 1.06 [95% CI 0.97 to 1.17]). No reduction in revascularization rates (25.2% vs. 24.5%, OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.94 to 1.14]) or cumulative adverse cardiac events rates up to one year after treatment were seen with ablative devices (27.8% vs. 26.1%, OR 1.09 [95% CI 0.99 to 1.20]).
Conclusions
The combined experience from randomized trials suggests that ablative devices failed to achieve predefined clinical and angiographic outcomes. This meta-analysis does not support the hypothesis that routine ablation or sectioning of atheromatous tissue is beneficial during percutaneous coronary interventions.
Keywords :
odds ratio , myocardial infarction , Confidence interval , mace , MI , LA , OR , DCA , CI , CBA , coronary balloon atherotomy , directional coronary atherectomy , ELA , excimer laser coronary angioplasty , (excimer or holmium) laser angioplasty , major adverse cardiac events , PTRA , percutaneous transluminal rotational atherectomy
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)