Clinical outcomes of rotational atherectomy followed by cutting balloon for calcified coronary lesions.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Tingquan Zhou, Xian Jin, Shixin Ma, Jiming Han, Chengxing Shen
{"title":"Clinical outcomes of rotational atherectomy followed by cutting balloon for calcified coronary lesions.","authors":"Tingquan Zhou, Xian Jin, Shixin Ma, Jiming Han, Chengxing Shen","doi":"10.1097/MCA.0000000000001515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Rotational atherectomy is an effective method for treating severe coronary artery calcification; however, several challenges in its clinical application persist. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of rotational atherectomy combined with cutting balloon (RACB) versus rotational atherectomy with plain balloon (RAPB) in patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational cohort study included 326 patients who underwent rotational atherectomy at Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital from January 2016 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups (RACB and RAPB) on the basis of the type of balloon used. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to minimize bias, and survival analyses were performed with the Cox proportional hazards model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The procedural complication rates of the patients in the RACB and RAPB groups were comparable. Baseline covariates were balanced between groups after adjustment via PSM. Patients receiving RACB during their procedures had a lower MACE rate during the first postprocedural year in the unadjusted analysis (6.7% vs 16.2%, P < 0.05) and after adjustment with PSM (5.6% vs 16.1%, P < 0.01). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed hazard ratios of 0.44 (95% CI: 0.23-0.82; P < 0.05) for the unadjusted model and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.17-0.76; P < 0.01) for the PSM-adjusted model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Performing RACB before stent implantation was demonstrated to be a safe and effective strategy for managing severely calcified coronary lesions.</p>","PeriodicalId":10702,"journal":{"name":"Coronary artery disease","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coronary artery disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCA.0000000000001515","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Rotational atherectomy is an effective method for treating severe coronary artery calcification; however, several challenges in its clinical application persist. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of rotational atherectomy combined with cutting balloon (RACB) versus rotational atherectomy with plain balloon (RAPB) in patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions.

Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study included 326 patients who underwent rotational atherectomy at Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital from January 2016 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups (RACB and RAPB) on the basis of the type of balloon used. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to minimize bias, and survival analyses were performed with the Cox proportional hazards model.

Results: The procedural complication rates of the patients in the RACB and RAPB groups were comparable. Baseline covariates were balanced between groups after adjustment via PSM. Patients receiving RACB during their procedures had a lower MACE rate during the first postprocedural year in the unadjusted analysis (6.7% vs 16.2%, P < 0.05) and after adjustment with PSM (5.6% vs 16.1%, P < 0.01). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed hazard ratios of 0.44 (95% CI: 0.23-0.82; P < 0.05) for the unadjusted model and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.17-0.76; P < 0.01) for the PSM-adjusted model.

Conclusion: Performing RACB before stent implantation was demonstrated to be a safe and effective strategy for managing severely calcified coronary lesions.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Coronary artery disease
Coronary artery disease 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
190
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Coronary Artery Disease welcomes reports of original research with a clinical emphasis, including observational studies, clinical trials, translational research, novel imaging, pharmacology and interventional approaches as well as advances in laboratory research that contribute to the understanding of coronary artery disease. Each issue of Coronary Artery Disease is divided into four areas of focus: Original Research articles, Review in Depth articles by leading experts in the field, Editorials and Images in Coronary Artery Disease. The Editorials will comment on selected original research published in each issue of Coronary Artery Disease, as well as highlight controversies in coronary artery disease understanding and management. Submitted artcles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and​ peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信