Optimal coronary balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting versus primary stent (OCBAS): immediate and long-term follow-up results

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare two strategies of revascularization in patients obtaining a good immediate angiographic result after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA): elective stenting versus optimal PTCA. A good immediate angiographic result with provisional stenting was considered to occur only if early loss in minimal luminal diameter (MLD) was documented at 30 min post-PTCA angiography. BACKGROUND: Coronary stenting reduces restenosis in lesions exhibiting early deterioration (>0.3 mm) in MLD within the first 24 hours (early loss) after successful PTCA. Lesions with no early loss after PTCA have a low restenosis rate. METHODS: To compare angiographic restenosis and target vessel revascularization (TVR) of lesions treated with coronary stenting versus those treated with optimal PTCA, 116 patients were randomized to stent (n=57) or to optimal PTCA (n=59). After randomization in the PTCA group, 13.5% of the patients crossed over to stent due to early loss (provisional stenting). RESULTS: Baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics were similar in both groups of patients. At 7.6 months, 96.6% of the entire population had a follow-up angiographic study: 98.2% in the stent and 94.9% in the PTCA group. Immediate and follow-up angiographic data showed that acute gain was significantly higher in the stent than in the PTCA group (1.95 vs. 1.5 mm; p < 0.03). However, late loss was significantly higher in the stent than the PTCA group (0.63+/-0.59 vs. 0.26+/-0.44, respectively; p=0.01). Hence, net gain with both techniques was similar (1.32< or =0.3 vs. 1.24+/-0.29 mm for the stent and the PTCA groups, respectively; p=NS). Angiographic restenosis rate at follow-up (19.2% in stent vs. 16.4% in PTCA; p=NS) and TVR (17.5% in stent vs. 13.5% in PTCA; p=NS) were similar. Furthermore, event-free survival was 80.8% in the stent versus 83.1% in the PTCA group (p=NS). Overall costs (hospital and follow-up) were US $591,740 in the stent versus US $398,480 in the PTCA group (p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The strategy of PTCA with delay angiogram and provisional stent if early loss occurs had similar restenosis rate and TVR, but lower cost than primary stenting after PTCA.     

Restenosis rates in diabetic patients: a comparison of coronary stenting and balloon angioplasty in native coronary vessels

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a major risk factor for restenosis after coronary balloon angioplasty. Recent studies have shown that coronary stenting significantly reduces restenosis compared with balloon angioplasty alone. However, limited information is available on the effect of coronary stenting in diabetic patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We designed this study to analyze the effect of diabetes on restenosis in patients treated with either balloon angioplasty or coronary stenting who were enrolled in a 6-month angiographic follow-up program. Three hundred consecutive patients, 19% of whom were diabetics, who underwent coronary stent implantation during a single-vessel procedure on native coronary vessels and who had 6-month angiographic follow-up constituted the study group (stent group). Three hundred consecutive patients who underwent 6-month angiographic follow-up after single-vessel conventional balloon angioplasty served as control patients (balloon group). Preprocedural, postprocedural, and follow-up angiograms were analyzed with quantitative angiography. In the balloon group, the restenosis rate was almost twofold higher in diabetic than in nondiabetic patients (63% versus 36%; P=.0002) owing to both a greater late loss (0.79+/-0.70 versus 0.41+/-0.61 mm, respectively; P<.0001) and a higher rate of late vessel occlusion (14% versus 3%, respectively; P<.001). In the stent group, restenosis rates were similar in diabetics and nondiabetics (25% versus 27%, respectively). Furthermore, in the stent group, late loss (0.77+/-0.65 versus 0.79+/-0.57 mm, respectively) and the rate of late vessel occlusion (2% versus 1%, respectively) did not differ significantly between diabetic and nondiabetic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although diabetics have increased rates of restenosis and late vessel occlusion after simple balloon angioplasty, they have the same improved outcome with coronary stenting that has been documented in nondiabetic patients.     

Are directional coronary atherectomy and Palmaz-Schatz stent more efficacious than conventional balloon angioplasty for treating de novo coronary artery lesions?

It is unclear whether new devices such as directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) or Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation improve long-term outcomes compared with conventional balloon angioplasty in patients with stable angina and de novo coronary artery lesions of type A or type B except for complete occlusive lesions investigated by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A total of 146 patients with stable angina and simple lesions were assigned to either conventional balloon angioplasty (62 patients), DCA (50 patients), or Palmaz-Schatz implantation (34 patients). The acute results and late outcomes were assessed by coronary angiography. The results of the three procedures were similar with respect to procedural success and complications. Patients who underwent stenting or DCA had a larger immediate increase in the diameter of the lumen and a larger luminal diameter immediately after the procedure than those who underwent balloon angioplasty. At six months follow-up, the patients treated by stenting continued to have a larger luminal diameter and a lower rate of restenosis than those treated with balloon angioplasty (2.30 +/- 0.66 vs 1.85 +/- 0.83 mm, p < 0.005; 5.9% vs 29%, p < 0.05) and DCA (2.30 +/- 0.66 vs 1.90 +/- 0.96 mm, p < 0.05; 5.9% vs 24%, NS). The patients treated with balloon angioplasty had a smaller late loss than those treated with DCA or Palmaz-Schatz stent. The patients treated with DCA had a larger loss index than those treated with balloon angioplasty or Palmaz-Schatz stent. Stenting was a significant factor in decreasing the rate of restenosis by logistic regression analysis, compared with balloon angioplasty. The angiographic outcomes were better in patients who received a stent than in those who received other treatments. This study suggests that even lesions stable for treatment by balloon angioplasty and DCA can also be treated with Palmaz-Schatz stents.     

Primary stenting of de novo lesions in small coronary arteries: a prospective, pilot study

Technical advancement and new anti-thrombotic regimens have recently shown so much improvement in the results of coronary stenting that the conventional contra-indication for stenting in small coronary arteries (<3 mm) needs to be revised. We undertook a prospective pilot study of elective Palmaz-Schatz stenting in de novo lesions located in coronary arteries of less than 3 mm diameter. Fifty consecutive patients (63 +/- 9 years) with stable (n = 38) and unstable angina (n = 12) were included. Philips-DCI quantitative coronary analysis was used to measure reference diameter, minimal lumen diameter and percent diameter stenosis before PTCA, after stenting and at 6-month angiographic follow-up study. All measurements were performed after intracoronary injection of nitroglycerin (300 microg). All patients received ticlopidine (250 mg/day) and aspirin (100 mg/day). The mean lesion length was 9 +/- 3 mm. The balloon size used for stent delivery was 2.75 mm in 30 patients and 2.5 mm in 20 patients and the mean balloon inflation pressure used for stent deployment was 12 +/- 2 atm. All stents were deployed successfully. In-hospital complications occurred in two patients, diagonal branch occlusion at day 2 requiring emergency PTCA in one and a hematoma at the femoral puncture site requiring surgery in the other. Major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate remained 2% (nonfatal infarct in one). Follow-up angiography (n = 46, 92%) at 6 +/- 3 months showed a 30% restenosis rate. Target vessel revascularization (TVR) rate was 13%. We conclude that elective stenting in small coronary arteries is feasible and involves an acceptable risk of restenosis.     

Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in cirrhosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Prophylaxis against the first variceal bleeding has been proposed to reduce morbidity and mortality in cirrhotic patients. No previous information is available regarding the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of variceal bleeding prophylaxis with propranolol, sclerotherapy, and shunt surgery in cirrhotic patients stratified by bleeding risk. METHODS: A hypothetical cohort was stratified according to bleeding risk. The natural history of cirrhosis with esophageal varices was simulated using a Markov model. Transitional probabilities extracted from published studies and costs were obtained from our institution's billing department. Sensitivity analyses were performed for important variables. RESULTS: Propranolol results in cost savings ranging between $450 and $14,600 over a 5-year period. The extent of cost savings depended on the individual patient's bleeding risk. In addition, propranolol increased the quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.1-0.4 years. Sclerotherapy was significantly less cost-effective than propranolol and had no advantage on quality of life. Shunt surgery was effective therapy for prevention of bleeding but decreased life expectancy and quality of life in some risk groups and was not cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Propranolol is the only cost-effective form of prophylactic therapy for preventing initial variceal bleeding in cirrhosis regardless of bleeding risk.     

Economic impact on physicians and hospitals of proposed changes in Medicare reimbursement for coronary interventions

BACKGROUND: The federal government is implementing changes in reimbursement for angioplasty and coronary stenting. These include reductions in physician reimbursement and a redesignation of intracoronary stents to a different diagnosis-related group than other methods of intracoronary intervention. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the financial impact on physicians and hospitals of proposed federal reimbursement policies for percutaneous coronary revascularization procedures. METHODS: We modeled the financial effects of 3 different stenting strategies: strategy I is the most conservative, with stents reserved for addressing lab complications; strategy II stents are used for suboptimal results after attempts at conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA); strategy III is the most aggressive, with initial stenting of all accessible lesions. We used economic data on PTCA and stent costs from a 1996 dataset and made assumptions about PTCA and stent success rates and restenosis rates based on published data. RESULTS: Under current reimbursement policies, physician revenues and profits are approximately equal under all 3 stenting strategies. After the proposed changes, there is a slight financial incentive for physicians to pursue the more aggressive strategy III, but the major financial effect is a substantial overall decline in revenues with any of the 3 strategies. For hospitals, the present situation strongly favors the more conservative strategies, but after the proposed changes the more aggressive stenting strategies will be more profitable, thus realigning physician and hospital incentives. Health care delivery organizations that combine physician and hospital income streams achieve the greatest financial stability. CONCLUSIONS: Current reimbursement policies for angioplasty and stenting have created misaligned incentives between physicians and hospitals. Proposed changes do not present physicians with large economic incentives to pursue aggressive versus conservative stent strategies but substantially address the current disparity in hospital financial incentives.     

Accuracy of treadmill exercise electrocardiography in detecting restenosis following single-vessel percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty

To develop an improved method for diagnosing restenosis using treadmill exercise electrocardiography (ECG) following percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), we prospectively evaluated 46 patients who underwent PTCA for the treatment of single-vessel coronary artery disease and who did not have a history of myocardial infarction. Treadmill exercise ECG and coronary angiography were performed 3 months after PTCA to determine their accuracy in diagnosing restenosis based on standard ST-segment depression criteria, the difference between the maximum ST-segment depression before and 3 months after PTCA (< or =0.5 mm: positive; >0.5 mm: negative), and the difference between sigmaST-segment depression before PTCA and 3 months after PTCA (< or = 1.5 mm: positive; > 1.5 mm: negative). The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of standard ST-segment depression criteria were 65%, 66%, and 65%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the difference in maximum ST-segment depression were 77%, 76%, and 76%, respectively, whereas the values for the difference in sigmaST-segment depression were 77%, 83%, and 80%, respectively. Based on these results, we conclude that using the difference between ST-segment depression before and after PTCA improves the accuracy of treadmill exercise ECG for diagnosing restenosis.     

A clinical trial comparing primary stenting of the infarct-related artery with optimal primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: results from the Florence Randomized Elective Stenting in Acute Coronary Occlusions (FRESCO) trial

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare stenting of the primary infarct-related artery (IRA) with optimal primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) with respect to clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients with an acute myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: Early and late restenosis or reocclusion of the IRA after successful primary PTCA significantly contributes to increased patient morbidity and mortality. Coronary stenting results in a lower rate of angiographic and clinical restenosis than standard PTCA in patients with angina and with previously untreated, noncomplex lesions. METHODS: After successful primary PTCA, 150 patients were randomly assigned to elective stenting or no further intervention. The primary end point of the trial was a composite end point, defined as death, reinfarction or repeat target vessel revascularization as a consequence of recurrent ischemia within 6 months of randomization. The secondary end point was angiographic evidence of restenosis or reocclusion at 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: Stenting of the IRA was successful in all patients randomized to stent treatment. At 6 months, the incidence of the primary end point was 9% in the stent group and 28% in the PTCA group (p=0.003); the incidence of restenosis or reocclusion was 17% in the stent group and 43% in the PTCA group (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Primary stenting of the IRA, compared with optimal primary angioplasty, results in a lower rate of major adverse events related to recurrent ischemia and a lower rate of angiographically detected restenosis or reocclusion of the IRA.     

Immobilization of domestic goats (Capra hircus) using orally administered carfentanil citrate and detomidine hydrochloride

A total of 147 stents were implanted (in overlapping manner in 76% of vessels) in a single coronary artery in 59 patients (60 vessels, 97 lesions, 2.45 stents/vessel) over a period of 18 mo using high pressure stent deployment without ultrasound guidance. The indications for stenting were suboptimal percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) result (45%), primary prevention of restenosis (44%), acute closure (10%), and restenosis after plain balloon angioplasty (1%). One patient required emergency coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (extensive dissection), and one required early intervention with plain balloon angioplasty and intracoronary urokinase for stent thrombosis. There were no deaths. Thirteen patients had recurrence of angina within 6 mo and angiograms were performed in all. These showed intrastent restenosis in nine (all had successful repeat plain balloon angioplasty), development of new disease in other vessels along with restenosis close to the stent in the target vessel in one (underwent elective CABG) and normal angiograms with widely patent stents in three. Forty-five patients (77%) remained free of recurrent angina and 25 of these had follow-up angiograms (56%) at a mean of 172 days, two showing restenosis. Thus, the restenosis rate per patient in the symptomatic group (angiographic follow-up in 100%) was 77% and in the asymptomatic group (angiographic follow-up in 56%) was 8%. The restenosis rate in the subgroup with bailout stenting (n = 6) was 20% (angiographic follow-up in 83%). The overall restenosis rate per patient was 32% (overall angiographic follow-up in 66%). During the 6-mo follow-up period, one patient underwent elective CABG (1.7%), one sustained a non-Q myocardial infarction (1.7%), nine had repeat PTCA to the target vessel (15.5%), and there were no deaths. The event-free survival rate was 77%. Multiple stent implantation aided by high pressure stent deployment without ultrasound guidance and with adjunctive optimal antiplatelet therapy without oral anticoagulation seems to be a useful and effective revascularisation strategy to deal with long lesions and acute dissections with a high procedural success rate. The restenosis rate is acceptable and is not appreciably high as reported in previous studies from the "warfarin era."     

Long-term results of RITA-1 trial: clinical and cost comparisons of coronary angioplasty and coronary-artery bypass grafting. Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) are both effective intervention strategies for patients with coronary heart disease. We report comparative long-term clinical and health-service cost findings for these interventions in the first Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA-1) trial. METHODS: 1011 patients with coronary heart disease (45% single-vessel, 55% multivessel) were randomly assigned initial treatment strategies of PTCA or CABG. Information on clinical events, subsequent intervention, symptomatic status, exercise testing, and use of health-care resources is available for a median 6.5 years of follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: The predefined primary endpoint of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 87 (17%) PTCA-group patients and 80 (16%) CABG-group patients (p=0.64). Similarly, there was no significant treatment difference in deaths alone (39 PTCA, 45 CABG), of which 46% were cardiac related. In both groups, the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction was more than five times higher in the first year than in subsequent years of follow-up. 26% of patients assigned PTCA subsequently also had CABG, and a further 19% required additional nonrandomised PTCA. Most of these reinterventions occurred within a year of randomisation, and from 3 years onwards the reintervention rate averaged 4% per year. In the CABG group the reintervention rate averaged 2% per year. The prevalence of angina was consistently higher in the PTCA group, with an absolute average 10% excess compared with the CABG group (p<0.001). Total health-service costs over 5 years showed no significant difference between initial strategies of PTCA and CABG (mean difference pounds sterling 426 [95% Cl -pounds sterling 383 to pounds sterling 1235]; p=0.30). The clinical and cost comparisons showed similar patterns for patients with single-vessel and multivessel disease. INTERPRETATION: Initial strategies of PTCA and CABG led to similar long-term results in terms of survival and avoidance of myocardial infarction and to similar long-term health-care costs. Choice of approach, therefore, rests on weighing the more invasive nature of CABG against the greater risk of recurrent angina and reintervention over many years after PTCA.     

Health service costs of coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial

For some patients with coronary artery disease, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) is an alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We report comparative health service costs of these interventions within the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Medications were costed at published UK prices; other resource use was costed with a set of unit costs estimated at two recruiting centres to the RITA trial, one in London and one outside. Over 2-year follow-up of 1011 patients, the estimated mean additional cost for those randomised to CABG compared with PTCA was 1050 pounds (95% CI 621 pounds-1479 pounds), with unit costs from the non-London centre, and 1823 pounds (1202 pounds-2444 pounds), with unit costs from the London centre. The initial average cost of treating a patient randomised to PTCA is about 52% of that of CABG, but after 2 years this increased to about 80% because of the greater need for subsequent interventions. The balance of advantage between PTCA and CABG may change after several years: funding has been obtained to continue RITA follow-up for 10 years. However, on the basis of patients' status at 2 years, the cost advantages of PTCA cannot be ignored. Further research is necessary to assess whether the advantage of PTCA in terms of cost is translated into one of cost-effectiveness.     

Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for stable angina pectoris: outcomes for patients with double-vessel versus single-vessel coronary artery disease in a Veterans Affairs Cooperative randomized trial. Veterans Affairs ACME InvestigatorS

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess outcomes of men with double-vessel coronary artery disease randomly assigned to treatment by percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) or medical therapy, compared with previously reported outcomes for men with single-vessel disease. BACKGROUND: We previously reported that PTCA provides better symptom relief and treadmill performance than medical therapy for men with stable angina pectoris due to single-vessel disease. Whether this advantage applies to patients with double-vessel disease is unknown. METHODS: Male patients (n = 328) with stable angina pectoris and ischemia on treadmill testing were randomly assigned to PTCA or medical therapy; 101 patients had double-vessel disease, and 227 had single-vessel disease. Symptoms, treadmill performance, quality of life score, coronary stenosis and myocardial perfusion were compared at baseline and at 6 months. Patients were followed up for up to 6 years and underwent additional treadmill testing 2 to 3 years after randomization. RESULTS: PTCA-treated and medically treated patients with double-vessel disease experienced comparable improvement in exercise duration (+1.2 vs. +1.3 min, respectively, p = 0.89), freedom from angina (53% and 36%, respectively, p = 0.09) and improvement of overall quality of life score (+1.3 vs. +4.4, respectively, p = 0.32) at 6 months compared with baseline. This contrasts with greater advantages favoring PTCA by these criteria in patients with single-vessel disease (p = 0.0001 to 0.02). Trends present at 6 months persisted at late follow-up. Patients undergoing double-vessel dilation had less complete initial revascularization (45% vs. 83%) and greater average stenosis of worst lesions at 6 months (74% vs. 56%). Likewise, patients with double-vessel disease showed less improved myocardial perfusion imaging (59% vs. 75%). CONCLUSIONS: PTCA is beneficial in male patients with double-vessel disease; however, we cannot demonstrate the same advantage over medical therapy seen in similar patients with single-vessel disease. Less complete revascularization and greater restenosis for patients having multiple dilations would account for these findings. Alternatively, a type 2 error might be operative. Technical advances since completion of this trial might improve these outcomes. These findings warrant further investigation in a larger trial.     

The prevention and treatment for restenosis in coronary angioplasty

Since the invention of Gruentzig AR in 1977, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) has become a widely accepted therapeutic modality for the treatment of patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD). Restenosis which occurs within six months is a major problem of PTCA. Several clinical trials of pharmacological regimen have failed to show significant improvements in restenosis. Palmaz-Schatz stent could improve in restenosis. STRESS and BENESTENT DCA also could improve in restenosis when aggressive debulking was succeeded (BOAT and OARS). The recent IVUS studies have demonstrated that vessel remodeling (vessel shrinking) was the major factor of restenosis. Stent contributes to the prevention of the vessel shrinking, which leads to the improvement in restenosis. However, the rapid increase in stent implantation rates with widening indications cancels the beneficial effect of stent.     

Procedural results and late clinical outcomes following multivessel coronary stenting

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes in a large consecutive series of patients undergoing percutaneous multivessel stent intervention. BACKGROUND: High restenosis and recurrent angina rates have limited the clinical outcomes of multivessel coronary angioplasty before stents were available to improve angioplasty results. METHODS: We evaluated in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes (death, Q-wave myocardial infarction [MI], and repeat revascularization rates at one year) in 398 consecutive patients treated with coronary stents in two (94% of patients) or three native arteries, compared to 1,941 patients undergoing stenting procedure in a single coronary artery between January 1, 1994 and August 29, 1997. RESULTS: Overall procedural success was obtained in 96% of patients with two- or three-vessel stenting and in 970% of patients with single-vessel stent intervention (p = 0.36). Procedural complications were also similar (3.8% for multivessel versus 2.9% for single vessel, p = 0.14). During follow up, target lesion revascularization was 15% in multivessel and 16% in single-vessel interventions (p = 0.38), and repeat revascularization (calculated per treated patient) was also similar for both groups (20% vs. 21%, p = 0.73). There was no difference in death (1.4% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.26), and Q-wave MI (1.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.02) was lower following multivessel interventions. Overall cardiac event-free survival was similar for both groups (p = 0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous conventional angioplasty experiences, multivessel stenting has (1) similar in-hospital procedural success and major complication rates and (2) similar long-term (one year) clinical outcomes compared with single-vessel stenting. Thus, stents may be a viable therapeutic strategy in carefully selected patients with multivessel coronary disease.     

PTCA for acute coronary syndrome

The use of intravenous thrombolytic therapy have revolutionized the medical management of acute MI, prolonging survival and preserving LV function. Yet, despite these important beneficial effects, many deficiencies exist, such as the fewer lytic eligible patients, the low rate of complete reperfusion and high incidence of recurrent Ischemia and intracranial hemorrhage. To improve on these deficiencies, several PTCA strategies for acute MI have emerged, including primary PTCA, rescue PTCA, immediate PTCA, and delayed PTCA. If skilled intervention-list and cath lab team are available, the optimal reperfusion strategy is primary PTCA. If a cath lab is not available and the patient is eligible for thrombolysis, intravenous thrombolytic therapy should be administered. Nevertheless, PTCA still has significant limitations, including complex lesion morphology and restenosis. Preliminary experience support the feasibility and safety of coronary stenting in the setting of acute MI. A randomized trial using the heparin-coated Palmaz-Schatz stent for primary stenting in MI is ongoing. Until a randomized trial data are available, we recommend stenting for provisional stenting.     

Coronary-artery stenting compared with balloon angioplasty for restenosis after initial balloon angioplasty. Restenosis Stent Study Group

BACKGROUND: Intracoronary stenting reduces the rate of restenosis after angioplasty in patients with new coronary lesions. We conducted a prospective, randomized, multicenter study to determine whether intracoronary stenting, as compared with standard balloon angioplasty, reduces the recurrence of luminal narrowing in restenotic lesions. METHODS: A total of 383 patients who had undergone at least one balloon angioplasty and who had clinical and angiographic evidence of restenosis after the procedure were randomly assigned to undergo standard balloon angioplasty (192 patients) or intracoronary stenting with a Palmaz-Schatz stent (191 patients). The primary end point was angiographic evidence of restenosis (defined as stenosis of more than 50 percent of the luminal diameter) at six months. The secondary end points were death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, bypass surgery, and revascularization of the target vessel. RESULTS: The rate of restenosis was significantly higher in the angioplasty group than in the stent group (32 percent as compared with 18 percent, P= 0.03). Revascularization of the target vessel at six months was required in 27 percent of the angioplasty group but in only 10 percent of the stent group (P=0.001). This difference resulted from a smaller mean (+/-SD) minimal luminal diameter in the angioplasty group (1.85+/-0.56 mm) than in the stent group (2.04+/-0.66 mm), with a mean difference of 0.19 mm (P=0.01) at follow-up. Subacute thrombosis occurred in 0.6 percent of the angioplasty group and in 3.9 percent of the stent group. The rate of event-free survival at 250 days was 72 percent in the angioplasty group and 84 percent in the stent group (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Elective coronary stenting was effective in the treatment of restenosis after balloon angioplasty. Stenting resulted in a lower rate of recurrent stenosis despite a higher incidence of subacute thrombosis.     

Safety and cost-effectiveness of solvent-detergent-treated plasma. In search of a zero-risk blood supply

OBJECTIVE: To determine the public health and economic implications of solvent-detergent-treated frozen plasma (SD FP). While this processing technique nearly eliminates the risk of transmitting lipid-enveloped viruses (hepatitis B and C and human immunodeficiency virus), it has associated costs and, because it requires pooling many plasma units, may increase risks of nonenveloped virus transmission. DESIGN: A previously published Markov decision analysis model was modified to assess transfusion-related outcomes in hypothetical cohorts of plasma recipients. In-hospital mortality and other characteristics were determined in 61 patients receiving plasma transfusions at a medium-sized tertiary care center to provide data for the model. Other parameters were obtained from the medical literature. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Expected SD FP costs, benefits, and cost-effectiveness, assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year saved. RESULTS: Compared with untreated plasma, a unit of SD FP produces a net benefit of 35 minutes in quality-adjusted life expectancy at a cost of about $19. Extrapolated to the 2.2 million plasma units transfused annually in the United States, SD FP would save 147 quality-adjusted life-years at a cost of $42.5 million. The marginal cost-effectiveness, $289,300 per quality-adjusted life-year saved in the baseline analysis, was most sensitive to estimates of SD treatment cost and the clinical setting of plasma use. In sensitivity analysis, the net benefit of SD FP was negated by the existence of even a minute risk of nonenveloped virus infection. CONCLUSIONS: From a public health perspective, the relatively high costs and small benefits of reducing enveloped virus infection risks with SD FP (and the additional risks of noneveloped virus transmission) do not appear to justify widespread implementation of this new technology.     

Skin signs in the diagnosis of thallium poisoning

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the cost advantage of a strategy of same-sitting diagnostic catheterization and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) (ad hoc) in comparison with staged PTCA. BACKGROUND: It is widely assumed that an ad hoc strategy lowers costs by reducing the length of hospital stay (LOS). However, this assumption has not been examined in a contemporary data set. METHODS: We studied 395 patients undergoing PTCA during 6 consecutive months. Cost analysis was performed using standard cost-accounting methods and a mature cost-accounting system. Costs were examined within three clinical strata based on the indication for PTCA (stable angina, unstable angina and after myocardial infarction [MI]). RESULTS: For the entire patient cohort, there was no significant cost advantage of an ad hoc approach within any of the strata, although there was a nonsignificant trend toward an ad hoc approach in patients with stable angina. For patients treated with conventional balloon PTCA alone, the lack of a significant difference between ad hoc and staged strategies persisted. For patients who received stents, there was a significant cost advantage of an ad hoc approach in all three clinical strata. An important cost driver was the occurrence of complications. Differences in the rates of complications did not reach statistical significance between ad hoc and staged strategies, but even a small trend toward greater complications in patients who had the ad hoc strategy negated cost and LOS advantages. Our study had the power to detect significant cost differences of $1,300 for patients with stable angina, $2,100 for patients with unstable angina and $2,500 for post-MI patients. It is possible that we failed to detect smaller cost advantages as significant. CONCLUSIONS: A cost savings with an ad hoc strategy of PTCA could not be consistently demonstrated. The cost advantage of an ad hoc approach may be most readily realized in clinical settings where the intrinsic risks are low (e.g., stable angina) or in which the device used carries a reduced risk of complications (e.g., stenting), because even a small increase in the complication rate will negate any financial advantage of an ad hoc approach.     

Improving the results of coronary angioplasty

Coronary angioplasty has changed dramatically in the past three years with major reductions in suboptimal results and restenosis rates, and improvements in safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Intracoronary stent implantation with optimisation of strut expansion and the abandonment of anticoagulants after deployment, have led to less entry-site complications, facilitated early hospital discharge, virtually abolished subacute stent thrombosis and resulted in a 50% reduction in target vessel revascularisation. Adjuvant medical treatment with anti-platelet agents, including glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors, improves the safety of angioplasty and may further reduce the restenosis rate. Selective use of debulking devices has extended the indications for angioplasty. High resolution fluoroscopy, quantitative coronary angiography and intracoronary ultrasound leading to improved diagnosis, equipment selection and treatment have contributed to better outcomes. Further clinical trials will compare angioplasty and stent implantation with coronary bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary disease, and may extend the indications for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) to selected patients with three vessel disease.