Premium
Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: Restenosis after direct stenting versus stenting with predilation in patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease (ISAR‐DIRECT trial)
Author(s) -
Mehilli Julinda,
Kastrati Adnan,
Dirschinger Josef,
Etzel Lena,
Bollwein Hildegard,
Pache Jürgen,
Schühlen Helmut,
von Beckerath Nicolas,
Seyfarth Melchior,
Schmitt Claus,
Schömig Albert
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
catheterization and cardiovascular interventions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.988
H-Index - 116
eISSN - 1522-726X
pISSN - 1522-1946
DOI - 10.1002/ccd.10706
Subject(s) - medicine , restenosis , coronary stenting , cardiology , clinical endpoint , myocardial infarction , incidence (geometry) , revascularization , coronary artery disease , relative risk , randomized controlled trial , stent , confidence interval , physics , optics
The objective of this randomized study was to assess whether direct stenting leads to less restenosis than does conventional stenting (CS) with predilation in clinical practice. We included 910 patients who were randomly assigned to undergo either direct stenting (DS; n = 456) or CS (n = 454). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of angiographic restenosis (primary endpoint): 23.6% for DS and 21.0% for CS ( P = 0.41; relative risk = 1.1; 95% CI = 0.8–1.5). The incidence of target vessel revascularization was 17.3% among DS and 14.8% among CS patients ( P = 0.29; relative risk = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.8–1.6). The combined incidence of death or myocardial infarction at one year was 9.0% in the DS group and 7.0% in the CS group ( P = 0.28). In conclusion, direct stenting is not associated with any reduction of thrombotic and restenotic complications as compared to the conventional stenting. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:190–195. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.