Initial clinical experience of intracoronary coil (Gianturco-Roubin) stents for management of acute dissection after balloon angioplasty

Pathology of bailout coronary stenting in human beings

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to perform detailed postmortem analysis of bailout coronary stenting to gain insights into the mechanism of success or failure of the procedure. Bailout stenting is increasingly used for acute or threatened arterial closure after angioplasty. Few pathologic data from bailout stenting have been reported.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The coronary arteries from 6 cases of bailout stenting were analyzed at autopsy. All stents were placed for extensive coronary dissection or abrupt vessel closure after balloon angioplasty. Twenty stents (11 Palmaz-Schatz and 9 Gianturco-Roubin stents) were placed in 8 coronary arteries, ranging from 1 to 5 stents per artery. After stenting, angiography showed good coronary flow in 3 of 6 cases. All patients died secondary to acute myocardial infarction. Histologically, in all cases, the stents were well opposed to the coronary artery wall, with a focally widely patent lumen by compression of the dissection plane. However, in 4 of 6 cases, there was residual dissection present in the nonstented portion of the arteries proximal, proximal to, and between stents or distal to the stented segment, resulting in focal luminal compression or obstruction. In 2 cases, bailout stenting effectively covered the dissection and prevented luminal compression.

CONCLUSIONS

Bailout stenting for dissection after balloon angioplasty restores lumen patency in the stented segment. Residual dissection in nonstented segments adversely affects outcome and supports the need for continued development of new stents with increased trackability and tapering designs to more effectively treat major coronary dissections.

Coronary artery stenting: indications and cost implications

The practice of coronary stenting is evolving rapidly, with new stent designs, deployment techniques, and adjunctive therapy. In many respects, clinical practice is changing in advance of the availability of supporting data. The consistent excellent angiographic result with stent deployment exceeds that achieved by any other previous interventional device, and the extent to which this accounts for the exponential increase in stent utilization cannot be accurately determined but is undoubtedly considerable. Controlled randomized trials have confirmed that stent deployment is superior to balloon angioplasty in certain lesion subsets or clinical scenarios. These include focal de novo native vessel lesions, lesions with late recoil after balloon angioplasty, acute closure after balloon angioplasty, and proximal left anterior descending coronary artery lesions. In addition, observational data is persuasive in focal coronary saphenous vein graft lesions and aorto-ostial lesions. On the other hand, the evidence supporting the use of stents strictly to improve on a suboptimal result, possibly the most frequent indication, is indirect and circumstantial. Stents are expensive, but it was anticipated that with the reduction in restenosis not only would they be cost-effective but also ultimately would reduce costs. This hope has not as yet been realized. However, there is little question that the introduction of intracoronary stents has been the most significant and exciting development since the introduction of percutaneous revascularization almost 20 years ago. It has revitalized the field.