The Long-Term Clinical Effects of Heparin-Coated Coronary Stent.
10.4070/kcj.2002.32.9.773
- Author:
Hyung Wook PARK
1
;
Myung Ho JEONG
;
Ok Young PARK
;
In Soo KIM
;
Myung Ja CHOI
;
Seung Hyun LEE
;
Young Joon HONG
;
Weon KIM
;
Ju Han KIM
;
Woo Suk PARK
;
Jay Young RHEW
;
Young Keun AHN
;
Jeong Gwan CHO
;
Dong Lyun CHO
;
Jong Chun PARK
;
Jung Chaee KANG
Author Information
1. The Heart Center of Chonnam University Hospital, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
Coronary diseases;
Heparin;
Stents;
Restenosis
- MeSH:
Constriction, Pathologic;
Coronary Disease;
Death;
Follow-Up Studies;
Heparin;
Humans;
Jeollanam-do;
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention;
Phenobarbital;
Stents*;
Thrombosis
- From:Korean Circulation Journal
2002;32(9):773-780
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A heparin-coated stent has been reported to be effective in the prevention of restenosis in a porcine model. The aim of this study was to compare the long term effects of heparin-coated and bare stents in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with regard to the clinical and angiographic outcomes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients who underwent PCI at Chonnam National University Hospital between July 1999 and December 2000 were randomly assigned into two groups; Group I had control bare stents (n=15, 15 lesions, 59+/-12 years, 13 males) and Group II heparin coated stents (n=15, 15 lesions, 59+/-11 years, 14 males). Six months following stenting, follow-up coronary angiograms were performed in 24 (80%) patients. The average follow-up period was 22+/-6 months. RESULTS: The initial clinical and angiographic characteristics were no different between the two groups. The reference diameters (Group I; 2.84+/-0.57 mm, II; 3.34+/-0.57 mm), minimal luminal (Group I; 2.37+/-0.60 mm, II; 2.60+/-0.59 mm) and diameter stenosis (Group I; 16.8+/-8.8%, II; 22.6+/-8.6%) following stenting, were no different between the two groups. Subacute stent thrombosis was observed in 1 patient (6.7%) of Group I. On follow-up coronary angiograms, the reference (group I; 2.46+/-0.34 mm, group II; 2.70+/-0.43 mm), minimal luminal diameters (group I; 1.47+/-0.59 mm, group II; 1.64+/-0.80 mm) and diameter stenosis (group I; 39.4+/-25.1%, group II; 40.8+/-26.1%) diameters were also no different, and restenosis was observed in 3 (25%) patients of each group. One cardiac death and 3 target vessel revascularizations were observed in each group during follow-up. CONCLUSION: The heparin-coated coronary stents were not effective in the prevention of coronary stent restenosis.
