HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Oesterle, S. N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Oesterle, S. N.

Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:1045-1049
© 1998 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

---

Supplement

Beyond stents: third-generation coronary devices

^a Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, UCSF/Stanford Health Care, Stanford, California, USA

Presented at "Facts and Myths of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: Current Trends in Thoracic Surgery IV," New Orleans, LA, Jan 24, 1998.

Abstract

Despite extraordinary growth in percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (>400,000 cases in United States in 1997) patients are still routinely referred for bypass grafting in large numbers. Why? Second-generation devices (directional coronary atherectomy, high-speed rotational atherectomy [Rotablator], and stents) have expanded the application of percutaneous catheter treatment of coronary disease. Specifically, highly eccentric lesions in large vessels, heavily calcified lesions, and coronary dissections can be effectively treated with these devices. Stents have substantially reduced the incidence of restenosis, but this benefit is largely confined to vessels more than 3 mm in diameter and stenoses less than 20 mm in length. A third generation of coronary devices has evolved in the late 1990s in response to continuing failures of conventional balloon angioplasty, atherectomy, and stenting. The failures of the 1990s were (1) restenosis, including in-stent restenosis, (2) chronic total occlusions, (3) diffuse small-vessel disease, and (4) aged vein graft disease. In response to these challenges novel devices are being developed: (1) for restenosis, intracoronary radiation therapy (brachytherapy); (2) for chronic total occlusions, Prima Laser wire; (3) for diffuse small-vessel disease, percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization; and (4) for aged vein grafts, antiembolization devices. Each of these new catheter technologies will need to be economically and clinically reconciled with the multitude of minimally invasive surgical revascularization techniques that are rapidly evolving.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. H. Rubenstein, L. C. Harrell, B. V. Sheynberg, H. Schunkert, H. Bazari, and I. F. Palacios Are Patients With Renal Failure Good Candidates for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization in the New Device Era? Circulation, December 12, 2000; 102(24): 2966 - 2972. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. Mack Is there a future for minimally invasive cardiac surgery? Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., November 1, 1999; 16(suppl_2): S119 - S125. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]