![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Early deterioration of minimal luminal diameter immediately after PTCA, has been associated with an increase of late restenosis. Lesions with no early loss after PTCA have a low restenosis rate. Coronary stents reduce restenosis in lesions exhibiting early wall recoil. The purpose of the OCBAS study was to compare two strategies during coronary interventions; provision vs. elective stenting. 116 patients with good PTCA results were randomized to stent ( n = 57) or to optimal PTCA ( n = 59). After randomization in PTCA group, 13.5% of the patients crossed over to stent due to early loss (provisional stenting). Baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics were similar in both groups of patients. At 7.6 months, 96.6% of the entire population had a follow-up angiographic study; 98.2% in the stent and 94.9% in the PTCA group. Immediate and follow-up angiographic data showed that acute gain was significantly higher in the stent than in the PTCA group (1.95 vs. 1.5 mm; P < 0.03). However, late loss was significantly higher in the stent than the PTCA groups (0.63 - 0.59 vs. 0.26 - 0.44, respectively; P = 0.01). Hence, net gain with both techniques was similar (1.32 - 0.3 vs. 1.24 - 0.29 mm for the stent and PTCA groups respectively; P = NS). Angiographic restenosis rate at follow-up (19.2% in stent vs. 16.4% in PTCA; P = NS) and TVR (17.5 in stent vs. 13.5% in PTCA; P = NS) were also similar. Furthermore, event-free survival was 80.8% in the stent versus 83.1% in the PTCA group ( P = NS). Overall costs (hospital and follow-up) were US$591,740 in the stent versus US$398,480 in the PTCA group ( P < 0.02). The strategy of the PTCA with delay angiogram and provisional stent if early loss occurs, had similar restenosis rate and TVR than universal use of bare stents.