Search

Objective To investigate the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on provisional coronary bifurcation stenting under the complete guidance of intravascular-ultrasound (IVUS). Background The efficacy of such intervention has not yet been fully elucidated in the DM patients. Methods A total of 100 DM and 139 non-DM patients in a prospective multi-center registry of IVUS-guided bifurcation stenting were compared in angiographic results at 9 months. Vessel and luminal changes during the intervention were analyzed using the IVUS. Vascular healing at the follow-up was also investigated in 23 lesions in each group using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Results No difference was detected regarding baseline reference vessel diameter and minimum lumen diameter in proximal main vessel (MV), distal MV, and side branch (SB). The rate of everolimus-eluting stent use (78.4% vs. 78.3%), final kissing inflation (60.1% vs. 49.0%), and conversion to 2-stent strategy (2.9% vs. 2.8%) were also similar. In the DM group, late loss was greater in proximal MV (DM 0.23 ± 0.29 vs. non-DM 0.16 ± 0.24 mm, P

To investigate the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on provisional coronary bifurcation stenting under the complete guidance of intravascular-ultrasound (IVUS).The efficacy of such intervention has not yet been fully elucidated in the DM patients.A total of 100 DM and 139 non-DM patients in a prospective multi-center registry of IVUS-guided bifurcation stenting were compared in angiographic results at 9 months. Vessel and luminal changes during the intervention were analyzed using the IVUS. Vascular healing at the follow-up was also investigated in 23 lesions in each group using optical coherence tomography (OCT).No difference was detected regarding baseline reference vessel diameter and minimum lumen diameter in proximal main vessel (MV), distal MV, and side branch (SB). The rate of everolimus-eluting stent use (78.4% vs. 78.3%), final kissing inflation (60.1% vs. 49.0%), and conversion to 2-stent strategy (2.9% vs. 2.8%) were also similar. In the DM group, late loss was greater in proximal MV (DM 0.23 ± 0.29 vs. non-DM 0.16 ± 0.24 mm, P 0.05) and SB (0.04 ± 0.49 vs. -0.08 ± 0.35 mm, P 0.05). Smaller vessel area restricted stent expansion in the proximal MV (6.18 ± 1.67 vs. 6.72 ± 2.07 mmDespite IVUS optimization for coronary bifurcation, DM is potentially associated with smaller luminal gain, higher late-loss, and inhomogeneous vascular healing with frequent thrombus attachment in the proximal MV.