(Circulation. 2000;102:2930.)
© 2000 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
Randomized Comparison of Primary Stenting and Provisional Balloon Angioplasty Guided by Flow Velocity Measurement
From the Thoraxcenter, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (P.W.S., S.C.); the Cardiovascular Center, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium (B.d.B.); Instituto Dante Pazzanese, Sao Paulo, Brazil (J.E.S.); Academisch Medisch Centrum, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (J.P.); Kawasaki Central Hospital, Kawaka-Shi Kanagawa, Japan (T.M.); University Hospital Antwerp, Edegem-Antwerp, Belgium (C.V.); Allgemeines Krankenhaus der Stadt Wien, Vienna, Austria (P.P.); Hospital Santa Cruz, Linda-A-Velha, Portugal (R.S.-G.); Wessex Cardiology Center, Southampton, United Kingdom (I.S.); Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center, Athens, Greece (V.V.); Hôpital Universitaire de Mont-Godinne, Yvoir, Belgium (O.G.); Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands (N.P.); Instituto Cardiovascular de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina (J.B.); Cardialysis, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (G.-A.v.E., M.-A.M.); Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (E.B.); and the Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (B.v.H.).
Background—Coronary stenting improves outcomes compared with balloon angioplasty, but it is costly and may have other disadvantages. Limiting stent use to patients with a suboptimal result after angioplasty (provisional angioplasty) may be as effective and less expensive.
Methods and Results—To analyze the cost-effectiveness of provisional angioplasty, patients scheduled for single-vessel angioplasty were first randomized to receive primary stenting (97 patients) or balloon angioplasty guided by Doppler flow velocity and angiography (523 patients). Patients in the latter group were further randomized after optimization to either additional stenting or termination of the procedure to further investigate what is "optimal." An optimal result was defined as a flow reserve >2.5 and a diameter stenosis <36%. Bailout stenting was needed in 129 patients (25%) who were randomized to balloon angioplasty, and an optimal result was obtained in 184 of the 523 patients (35%). There was no significant difference in event-free survival at 1 year between primary stenting (86.6%) and provisional angioplasty (85.6%). Costs after 1 year were significantly higher for provisional angioplasty (EUR 6573 versus EUR 5885; P=0.014). Results after the second randomization showed that stenting was also more effective after optimal balloon angioplasty (1-year event free survival, 93.5% versus 84.1%; P=0.066).
Conclusions—After 1 year of follow-up, provisional angioplasty was more expensive and without clinical benefit. The beneficial value of stenting is not limited to patients with a suboptimal result after balloon angioplasty.
Key Words: stents • angioplasty • balloon • random allocation • cost-benefit analysis
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  E. Ilkay, L. Tirikli, I. Ozercan, M. Yavuzkir, I. Karaca, A. Rahman, and N. Arslan Oral Mycophenolate Mofetil Prevents In-Stent Intimal Hyperplasia Without Edge Effect Angiology, October 1, 2006; 57(5): 577 - 584. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Kern, A. Lerman, J.-W. Bech, B. De Bruyne, E. Eeckhout, W. F. Fearon, S. T. Higano, M. J. Lim, M. Meuwissen, J. J. Piek, et al. Physiological Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology Circulation, September 19, 2006; 114(12): 1321 - 1341. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Moreno, C. Fernandez, and C. Macaya Coronary stenting in small vessels Eur. Heart J., August 1, 2005; 26(15): 1562 - 1562. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B A van Hout, P W Serruys, P A Lemos, M J B M van den Brand, G-A v. Es, W K Lindeboom, and M-C Morice One year cost effectiveness of sirolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents in the treatment of single native de novo coronary lesions: an analysis from the RAVEL trial Heart, April 1, 2005; 91(4): 507 - 512. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. P. van Alem, M. G.W. Dijkgraaf, J. G.P. Tijssen, and R. W. Koster Health System Costs of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Relation to Time to Shock Circulation, October 5, 2004; 110(14): 1967 - 1973. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. M.G. Legrand, P. W. Serruys, F. Unger, B. A. van Hout, M. C.M. Vrolix, G. M.P. Fransen, T. T. Nielsen, P. K. Paulsen, R. S. Gomes, J. M.G. de Queiroz e Melo, et al. Three-Year Outcome After Coronary Stenting Versus Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Multivessel Disease Circulation, March 9, 2004; 109(9): 1114 - 1120. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. A. Cox, G. W. Stone, C. L. Grines, T. Stuckey, D. J. Cohen, J. E. Tcheng, E. Garcia, G. Guagliumi, R. S. Iwaoka, M. Fahy, et al. Outcomes of optimal or "stent-like"balloon angioplasty in acutemyocardial infarction: the CADILLAC trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 17, 2003; 42(6): 971 - 977. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. A. Morrison Counterintuitive contributionsto the care of myocardialinfarction and theneed for randomized trials J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 17, 2003; 42(6): 978 - 980. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. Brophy, P. Belisle, and L. Joseph Evidence for Use of Coronary Stents: A Hierarchical Bayesian Meta-Analysis Ann Intern Med, May 20, 2003; 138(10): 777 - 786. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D V Cokkinos, A Manginas, and V Voudris Coronary flow: clinical considerations Heart, April 1, 2003; 89(4): 361 - 363. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Barbato, J. Marco, and W. Wijns Direct stenting Eur. Heart J., March 1, 2003; 24(5): 394 - 403. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. C. Ferreira, A. A. Peter, T. A. Salerno, H. Bolooki, and E. de Marchena Clinical impact of drug-eluting stents in changing referral practices for coronary surgical revascularization in a tertiary care center Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2003; 75(2): 485 - 489. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M.-C. Morice, P. W. Serruys, J. E. Sousa, J. Fajadet, E. Ban Hayashi, M. Perin, A. Colombo, G. Schuler, P. Barragan, G. Guagliumi, et al. A Randomized Comparison of a Sirolimus-Eluting Stent with a Standard Stent for Coronary Revascularization N. Engl. J. Med., June 6, 2002; 346(23): 1773 - 1780. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Voskuil, R. A. M. van Liebergen, M. Albertal, E. Boersma, J. G. P. Tijssen, P. W. Serruys, J. J. Piek, and the DEBATE II Investigators Coronary hemodynamics of stent implantation after suboptimal and optimal balloon angioplasty J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 1, 2002; 39(9): 1513 - 1517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. W. Serruys, D. P. Foley, M.-J. Suttorp, B. J. W. M. Rensing, H. Suryapranata, P. Materne, A. van den Bos, E. Benit, A. Anzuini, W. Rutsch, et al. A randomized comparison of the value of additional stenting after optimal balloon angioplasty for long coronary lesions: Final results of the additional value of nir stents for treatment of long coronary lesions (ADVANCE) study J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 6, 2002; 39(3): 393 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S.J. Brener and E.J. Topol Epicardial versus microcirculatory dissociation Eur. Heart J., February 2, 2002; 23(4): 274 - 276. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Kern The meaning of suboptimal coronary flow reserve after coronary balloon angioplasty Eur. Heart J., January 2, 2002; 23(2): 99 - 100. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Seabra-Gomes Is there a future for coronary physiological evaluation in clinical decision making? Eur. Heart J., September 2, 2001; 22(18): 1633 - 1635. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.J Piek, E Boersma, M Voskuil, C di Mario, E Schroeder, C Vrints, P Probst, B de Bruyne, C Hanet, E Fleck, et al. The immediate and long-term effect of optimal balloon angioplasty on the absolute coronary blood flow velocity reserve. A subanalysis of the DEBATE study Eur. Heart J., September 2, 2001; 22(18): 1725 - 1732. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. J. Piek and M. J. Kern Interpretation of Trials on Provisional Stent Implantation Circulation, August 28, 2001; 104 (9): e43 - e43. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. J. Cantor, A. S. Hellkamp, E. D. Peterson, J. P. Zidar, P. A. Cowper, M. H. Sketch Jr, J. E. Tcheng, R. M. Califf, and E. M. Ohman Achieving optimal results with standard balloon angioplasty: can baseline and angiographic variables predict stent-like outcomes? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 1, 2001; 37(7): 1883 - 1890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Routine Stenting or Provisional, Doppler-Guided Stenting? Journal Watch Cardiology, February 16, 2001; 2001(216): 2 - 2. [Full Text]
|
|