A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of the CrossFlex and NIR Stents in Coronary Intervention.
10.4070/kcj.2002.32.5.385
- Author:
June Hong KIM
1
;
Seung Whan LEE
;
Myeong Ki HONG
;
Seong Wook PARK
;
Cheol Whan LEE
;
Jae Kwan SONG
;
Jae Joong KIM
;
Seung Jung PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Ulsan, Cardiac Center, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
Stents;
Coronary disease;
Coronary restenosis
- MeSH:
Constriction, Pathologic;
Coronary Artery Disease;
Coronary Disease;
Coronary Restenosis;
Coronary Stenosis;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Prospective Studies*;
Stents*;
Thrombosis
- From:Korean Circulation Journal
2002;32(5):385-390
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This prospective single-center randomized clinical study was designed to evaluate the long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes of elective treatment using the Crossflex (coil stent) as compared with the NIR (tubular stent) in patients with native coronary artery disease. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 104 patients with 107 de novo discrete coronary stenoses were randomly assigned to the NIR stent (54 coronary stenoses) or the Crossflex stent (53 coronary stenoses). Six-month follow-up angiograms were obtained in 83 patients with 86 lesions (80%). Clinical follow up was available in all patients and the period averaged 23.1+/-5.3 months in the Crossflex group and 23.1+/-6.2 months in the NIR group. RESULTS: Procedural success was measured at 100% in both groups. There were no cases of stent thrombosis in either group. Although a higher loss index and more severe follow-up diameter stenosis occurred in the crossflex group, the angiographic restenosis rate was not significantly different in between the groups.
