• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sun, 24.11.24

Search results


December 2019
Dror B Leviner MD, Guy Witberg MD, Amir Sharon MD, Yosif Boulos BsC, Alon Barsheshet MD, Erez Sharoni MD, Dan Spiegelstein MD, Hana Vaknin-Assa MD, Dan Aravot MD, Ran Kornowski MD and Abid Assali MD

Background: Current guidelines for choosing between revascularization modalities may not be appropriate for young patients.

Objectives: To compare outcomes and guide treatment options for patients < 40 years of age, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2008 and 2018.

Methods: Outcomes were compared for 183 consecutive patients aged < 40 years who underwent PCI or CABG between 2008 and 2018, Outcomes were compared as time to first event and as cumulative events for non-fatal outcomes.

Results: Mean patient age was 36.3 years and 96% were male. Risk factors were similar for both groups. Drug eluting stents were implemented in 71% of PCI patients and total arterial revascularization in 74% of CABG patients. During a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 16 patients (8.6%) died. First cardiovascular events occurred in 35 (38.8%) of the PCI group vs. 29 (31.1%) of the CABG group (log rank P = 0.022), repeat events occurred in 96 vs. 51 (P < 0.01), respectively. After multivariate adjustment, CABG was associated with a significantly reduced risk for first adverse event (hazard ratio [HR] 0.305, P < 0.01) caused by a reduction in repeat revascularization. CABG was also associated with a reduction in overall repeat events (HR 0.293, P < 0.01). There was no difference in overall mortality between CABG and PCI.

Conclusions: Young patients with coronary disease treated by CABG showed a reduction in the risk for non-fatal cardiac events. Mortality was similar with CABG and PCI.

July 2016
Guy Witberg MD, Ifat Lavi PhD, Hana Vaknin Assa MD, Katia Orvin MD, Abid Assali MD and Ran Kornowski MD FESC FACC

Background: Bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) is a promising technology that potentially offers several advantages over contemporary coronary drug-eluting stents (DES). Crucial to BVS implantation is the correct choice of scaffold size (diameter and length) in order to avoid "geographic miss" in length, provide the maximal support to the vessel wall, and avoid leaving “free-floating” foreign material in the coronary vasculature. 

Objectives: To assess the optimal method for measuring coronary stenosis prior to BVS implantation.

Methods: We compared the performance of two quantitative coronary angiography assessment (QCA) techniques: two dimensional real-time QCA (2D-QCA) and offline 3D QCA (3D-QCA) for the evaluation of coronary lesions in patients enrolled in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of BVS vs. metallic stents, by calculating the weighted kappa value for agreement regarding optimal BVS size with the reference method – CoreLab offline 2D-QCA measurements..In addition, we collected 2 year clinical outcomes (death/myocardial infarction/repeat revascularization/scaffold thrombosis) in BVS-implanted patients.

Results: In 17 patients with available CoreLab data, the weighted kappa for agreement for 3D-QCA was significantly better than for 2D-QCA (0.90, 95%CI 0.72–1.00 vs. 0.439, 95%CI 0.16–0.77). The rate of clinical events at 2 years was low (9.5%).

Conclusions: Initial experience in a small group of carefully selected patients at our institution, suggests that the use of BVS for coronary revascularization is associated with a low rate of adverse events in suitable patients. 3D-QCA may be superior to 2D-QCA analysis in terms of reproducibility, and results in more patients receiving optimal size BVS. 

 

Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel