SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Angiology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Iliadis, E. A.
Right arrow Articles by Klein, L. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Iliadis, E. A.
Right arrow Articles by Klein, L. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Relative Influence of Lesion Length and Other Stenosis Morphologies on Procedural Success of Coronary Intervention

Elias A. Iliadis

Stephen M. Zaacks

James E. Calvin

Jill Allen

Joseph E. Parrillo

Lloyd W. Klein, MD

Laboratory Jelke Pavilion, Suite 1035 Rush Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center 1653 West Congress Parkway Chicago, IL 60612

As coronary interventional technology improves, the influence of lesion length (LL) on procedural success and device selection may vary. Thus, the authors prospectively analyzed 957 consecutive coronary interventions (CI) in 1,404 stenoses to ascertain the influence of lesion length on CI outcome. Stenosis morphology was prospectively classi fied by the AHA/ACC criteria. LL was analyzed both as dichotomous (S: < 10 mm, L: > 10 mm) variables and by the three-tiered AHA/ACC criteria (I: < 10 mm, II: 10-20 mm, III: > 20 mm). There was a significant univariate relationship between CI success and S stenosis (S: 95.8% vs L: 91.8%, p = 0.002 and I: 96.0%, II: 91.7%, III: 89.3%). Numerous interrelationships involving the morphologic characteristics were noted: lesion morphologies associated with S lesions were concentric (p = 0.0001) and had smooth contour (p = 0.0001), ostial location (p = 0.05) and little calcification (p = 0.0007), while irregular contour (p = 0.0001), calcification (p = 0.0076), eccentric (p = 0.0001), thrombus (p = 0.0001), recent (p = 0.0001) or chronic (p = 0.001) total occlusion were associated with L lesions. When these relationships were taken into account by multiple logistic regression analysis, lesion length was not predictive of procedural outcome (p = 0.099). One morphologic type was associated with increased CI success: irregular contour (p = 0.022); recent (p < 0.0001) or chronic (< 0.0001) occlusions were associ- ated with decreased CI success. Another factor considered was device selection: S lesions were associated with greater balloon angioplasty usage (p = 0.002), whereas more coronary stents (p = 0.024) and rotoblator (p = 0.018) devices were used in L lesions. More balloon angioplasty was performed in concentric (p < 0.0001) lesions; interven tional devices were employed more often in eccentric (p < 0.0001) and irregular lesions (p < 0.0001). More complications were noted in lesions with thrombus (p = 0.0002), but lesion length was not predictive (p = NS). Lesion length is not a significant predictor of procedural success when adjusted for other lesion morphologies in the modern inter ventional era. The availability of new devices has improved the results in longer lesions since the AHA/ACC criteria were originally proposed.

Angiology, Vol. 51, No. 1, 39-52 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/000331970005100108


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement