TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of slow oscillating versus fast balloon inflation strategies for coronary angioplasty
AU - Blankenship, James C.
AU - Krucoff, Mitchell W.
AU - Werns, Steven W.
AU - Anderson, H. Vernon
AU - Landau, Charles
AU - White, Harvey J.
AU - Green, Cindy L.
AU - Spokojny, Artur M.
AU - Bach, Richard G.
AU - Raymond, Russell E.
AU - Pinkston, Jackie
AU - Rawert, Millie
AU - Talley, J. David
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by grants from USCI/C. R. Bard Inc, Billerica, Massachusetts, and Scimed Life Systems, Maple Grove, Minnesota.
PY - 1999/3/1
Y1 - 1999/3/1
N2 - Previous studies suggest that slow and/or oscillating balloon inflation during coronary angioplasty may decrease the incidence of coronary dissection and improve clinical outcomes. To compare the effect of slow oscillating versus conventional fast inflation techniques on the incidence of severe coronary dissection during angioplasty, 622 patients were randomized to slow oscillating inflation versus fast inflation. Angiographic outcomes of the procedures and in-hospital clinical events were recorded. The primary end point of severe (type C, D, E, F) dissection occurred in 7.7% of patients undergoing slow oscillation and 6.6% of patients undergoing fast inflation (p = 0.87). Major complications (death, urgent coronary artery bypass graft surgery, stroke, abrupt closure, or Q-wave myocardial infarction) occurred in 4.7% of patients undergoing slow oscillation and 3.5% of patients undergoing fast inflation (p = 0.45). The 2 inflation strategies did not differ in the pressure at which the balloon achieved full expansion, angiographic success rate, residual stenosis, and incidence of all minor and/or major complications. We conclude that there is no benefit of slow oscillating inflation over routine fast inflation in angioplasty. Slow oscillating inflation did not dilate lesions at lower pressures, decrease the incidence of dissection or severe dissection, or reduce the incidence of adverse clinical outcomes.
AB - Previous studies suggest that slow and/or oscillating balloon inflation during coronary angioplasty may decrease the incidence of coronary dissection and improve clinical outcomes. To compare the effect of slow oscillating versus conventional fast inflation techniques on the incidence of severe coronary dissection during angioplasty, 622 patients were randomized to slow oscillating inflation versus fast inflation. Angiographic outcomes of the procedures and in-hospital clinical events were recorded. The primary end point of severe (type C, D, E, F) dissection occurred in 7.7% of patients undergoing slow oscillation and 6.6% of patients undergoing fast inflation (p = 0.87). Major complications (death, urgent coronary artery bypass graft surgery, stroke, abrupt closure, or Q-wave myocardial infarction) occurred in 4.7% of patients undergoing slow oscillation and 3.5% of patients undergoing fast inflation (p = 0.45). The 2 inflation strategies did not differ in the pressure at which the balloon achieved full expansion, angiographic success rate, residual stenosis, and incidence of all minor and/or major complications. We conclude that there is no benefit of slow oscillating inflation over routine fast inflation in angioplasty. Slow oscillating inflation did not dilate lesions at lower pressures, decrease the incidence of dissection or severe dissection, or reduce the incidence of adverse clinical outcomes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033105106&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00969-2
DO - 10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00969-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 10080417
AN - SCOPUS:0033105106
SN - 0002-9149
VL - 83
SP - 675
EP - 680
JO - American Journal of Cardiology
JF - American Journal of Cardiology
IS - 5
ER -