Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)

Data on the clinical outcomes comparing synthetic fluorocarbon polymer polytetrafluoroethylene- (PTFE, GraftMaster) and polyurethane- (Papyrus) covered stents (CSs) to seal coronary artery perforations (CAPs) are limited. We aimed to evaluate 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes after PCI complicated...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jerzy Bartuś, Rafał Januszek, Damian Hudziak, Michalina Kołodziejczak, Łukasz Kuźma, Mateusz Tajstra, Tomasz Figatowski, Tomasz Pawłowski, Monika Gruz-Kwapisz, Malwina Smolarek-Nicpoń, Agnieszka Skoczyńska, Brunon Tomasiewicz, Adrian Włodarczak, Jan Kulczycki, Krzysztof Plens, Miłosz Jaguszewski, Sławomir Dobrzycki, Andrzej Ochała, Mariusz Gąsior, Krzysztof Reczuch, Stanisław Bartuś, Wojciech Wojakowski, Wojciech Wańha
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	MDPI AG 2021
Materias:	coronary artery perforation clinical outcomes covered stents PTFE and polyurethane stent comparison Medicine R
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f3e3fc2292214d9d9cfb98308ae43762
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f3e3fc2292214d9d9cfb98308ae43762
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f3e3fc2292214d9d9cfb98308ae437622021-11-25T18:02:52ZClinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)10.3390/jcm102254412077-0383https://doaj.org/article/f3e3fc2292214d9d9cfb98308ae437622021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/22/5441https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383Data on the clinical outcomes comparing synthetic fluorocarbon polymer polytetrafluoroethylene- (PTFE, GraftMaster) and polyurethane- (Papyrus) covered stents (CSs) to seal coronary artery perforations (CAPs) are limited. We aimed to evaluate 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes after PCI complicated by CAP and treated with CS. We assessed 106 consecutive patients with successful CAP sealing (122 CSs): GraftMaster (51 patients, 57 CSs) or Papyrus CS (55 patients, 65 CSs). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of cardiac death, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), and myocardial infarction (MI). The mean age of subjects was 69 ± 9.6 years (53.8% males). No significant differences were identified between the GraftMaster and Papyrus groups at the 30-day follow-up for MACE, cardiac death, MI and stent thrombosis (ST), while significantly lower rate of TLR and TVR (<i>p</i> = 0.02) were confirmed in the Papyrus group. At one year, differences remained similar between stents for MACE, a trend towards a lower rate of TLR (<i>p</i> = 0.07), MI (<i>p</i> = 0.08), and ST (<i>p</i> = 0.08), and higher for cardiac death (<i>p</i> = 0.07) was observed in the Papyrus group. This real-life registry of CAP illustrated that the use of Papyrus CS is associated with lower rates of TLR and TVR at 30-day follow-up in comparison to the GraftMaster CSs and no significant differences between both assessed CS at one year of follow-up.Jerzy BartuśRafał JanuszekDamian HudziakMichalina KołodziejczakŁukasz KuźmaMateusz TajstraTomasz FigatowskiTomasz PawłowskiMonika Gruz-KwapiszMalwina Smolarek-NicpońAgnieszka SkoczyńskaBrunon TomasiewiczAdrian WłodarczakJan KulczyckiKrzysztof PlensMiłosz JaguszewskiSławomir DobrzyckiAndrzej OchałaMariusz GąsiorKrzysztof ReczuchStanisław BartuśWojciech WojakowskiWojciech WańhaMDPI AGarticlecoronary artery perforationclinical outcomescovered stentsPTFE and polyurethane stent comparisonMedicineRENJournal of Clinical Medicine, Vol 10, Iss 5441, p 5441 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	coronary artery perforation clinical outcomes covered stents PTFE and polyurethane stent comparison Medicine R
spellingShingle	coronary artery perforation clinical outcomes covered stents PTFE and polyurethane stent comparison Medicine R Jerzy Bartuś Rafał Januszek Damian Hudziak Michalina Kołodziejczak Łukasz Kuźma Mateusz Tajstra Tomasz Figatowski Tomasz Pawłowski Monika Gruz-Kwapisz Malwina Smolarek-Nicpoń Agnieszka Skoczyńska Brunon Tomasiewicz Adrian Włodarczak Jan Kulczycki Krzysztof Plens Miłosz Jaguszewski Sławomir Dobrzycki Andrzej Ochała Mariusz Gąsior Krzysztof Reczuch Stanisław Bartuś Wojciech Wojakowski Wojciech Wańha Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)
description	Data on the clinical outcomes comparing synthetic fluorocarbon polymer polytetrafluoroethylene- (PTFE, GraftMaster) and polyurethane- (Papyrus) covered stents (CSs) to seal coronary artery perforations (CAPs) are limited. We aimed to evaluate 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes after PCI complicated by CAP and treated with CS. We assessed 106 consecutive patients with successful CAP sealing (122 CSs): GraftMaster (51 patients, 57 CSs) or Papyrus CS (55 patients, 65 CSs). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of cardiac death, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), and myocardial infarction (MI). The mean age of subjects was 69 ± 9.6 years (53.8% males). No significant differences were identified between the GraftMaster and Papyrus groups at the 30-day follow-up for MACE, cardiac death, MI and stent thrombosis (ST), while significantly lower rate of TLR and TVR (<i>p</i> = 0.02) were confirmed in the Papyrus group. At one year, differences remained similar between stents for MACE, a trend towards a lower rate of TLR (<i>p</i> = 0.07), MI (<i>p</i> = 0.08), and ST (<i>p</i> = 0.08), and higher for cardiac death (<i>p</i> = 0.07) was observed in the Papyrus group. This real-life registry of CAP illustrated that the use of Papyrus CS is associated with lower rates of TLR and TVR at 30-day follow-up in comparison to the GraftMaster CSs and no significant differences between both assessed CS at one year of follow-up.
format	article
author	Jerzy Bartuś Rafał Januszek Damian Hudziak Michalina Kołodziejczak Łukasz Kuźma Mateusz Tajstra Tomasz Figatowski Tomasz Pawłowski Monika Gruz-Kwapisz Malwina Smolarek-Nicpoń Agnieszka Skoczyńska Brunon Tomasiewicz Adrian Włodarczak Jan Kulczycki Krzysztof Plens Miłosz Jaguszewski Sławomir Dobrzycki Andrzej Ochała Mariusz Gąsior Krzysztof Reczuch Stanisław Bartuś Wojciech Wojakowski Wojciech Wańha
author_facet	Jerzy Bartuś Rafał Januszek Damian Hudziak Michalina Kołodziejczak Łukasz Kuźma Mateusz Tajstra Tomasz Figatowski Tomasz Pawłowski Monika Gruz-Kwapisz Malwina Smolarek-Nicpoń Agnieszka Skoczyńska Brunon Tomasiewicz Adrian Włodarczak Jan Kulczycki Krzysztof Plens Miłosz Jaguszewski Sławomir Dobrzycki Andrzej Ochała Mariusz Gąsior Krzysztof Reczuch Stanisław Bartuś Wojciech Wojakowski Wojciech Wańha
author_sort	Jerzy Bartuś
title	Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)
title_short	Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)
title_full	Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)
title_fullStr	Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)
title_full_unstemmed	Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)
title_sort	clinical outcomes following large vessel coronary artery perforation treated with covered stent implantation: comparison between polytetrafluoroethylene- and polyurethane-covered stents (crack-ii registry)
publisher	MDPI AG
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/f3e3fc2292214d9d9cfb98308ae43762
work_keys_str_mv	AT jerzybartus clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT rafałjanuszek clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT damianhudziak clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT michalinakołodziejczak clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT łukaszkuzma clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT mateusztajstra clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT tomaszfigatowski clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT tomaszpawłowski clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT monikagruzkwapisz clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT malwinasmolareknicpon clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT agnieszkaskoczynska clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT brunontomasiewicz clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT adrianwłodarczak clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT jankulczycki clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT krzysztofplens clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT miłoszjaguszewski clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT sławomirdobrzycki clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT andrzejochała clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT mariuszgasior clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT krzysztofreczuch clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT stanisławbartus clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT wojciechwojakowski clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry AT wojciechwanha clinicaloutcomesfollowinglargevesselcoronaryarteryperforationtreatedwithcoveredstentimplantationcomparisonbetweenpolytetrafluoroethyleneandpolyurethanecoveredstentscrackiiregistry
_version_	1718411717473468416

Clinical Outcomes following Large Vessel Coronary Artery Perforation Treated with Covered Stent Implantation: Comparison between Polytetrafluoroethylene- and Polyurethane-Covered Stents (CRACK-II Registry)

Ejemplares similares