冠状动脉钙化结节介入治疗方案的比较:ROTA.shock试验的子分析

IF 1.6 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.carrev.2024.05.030
Florian Blachutzik , Sophie Meier , Melissa Blachutzik , Sophia Schlattner , Tommaso Gori , Helen Ullrich-Daub , Luise Gaede , Stephan Achenbach , Helge Möllmann , Bogdan Chitic , Adem Aksoy , Georg Nickenig , Maren Weferling , Oliver Dörr , Niklas Boeder , Matthias Bayer , Christian Hamm , Holger Nef , ROTA.shock Investigators
{"title":"冠状动脉钙化结节介入治疗方案的比较:ROTA.shock试验的子分析","authors":"Florian Blachutzik ,&nbsp;Sophie Meier ,&nbsp;Melissa Blachutzik ,&nbsp;Sophia Schlattner ,&nbsp;Tommaso Gori ,&nbsp;Helen Ullrich-Daub ,&nbsp;Luise Gaede ,&nbsp;Stephan Achenbach ,&nbsp;Helge Möllmann ,&nbsp;Bogdan Chitic ,&nbsp;Adem Aksoy ,&nbsp;Georg Nickenig ,&nbsp;Maren Weferling ,&nbsp;Oliver Dörr ,&nbsp;Niklas Boeder ,&nbsp;Matthias Bayer ,&nbsp;Christian Hamm ,&nbsp;Holger Nef ,&nbsp;ROTA.shock Investigators","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2024.05.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The optimal treatment for coronary calcified nodules (CNs) is still unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the modification of these lesions by coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and rotational atherectomy (RA) using optical coherence tomography (OCT).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>ROTA.shock was a 1:1 randomized, prospective, double-arm multi-center non-inferiority trial that compared the use of IVL and RA with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in severely calcified lesions. In 19 of the patients out of this study CNs were detected by OCT in the target lesion and were treated by either IVL or RA.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean angle of CNs was significantly larger in final OCT scans than before RA (92 ± 17° vs. 68 ± 7°; <em>p</em> = 0.01) and IVL (89 ± 18° vs. 60 ± 10°; <em>p</em> = 0.03). The CNs were thinner upon final scans than in initial native scans (RA: 17.8 ± 7.8 mm vs. 38.6 ± 13.1 mm; <em>p</em> = 0.02; IVL: 16.5 ± 9.0 mm vs. 37.2 ± 14.3 mm; p = 0.02). Nodule volume did not differ significantly between native and final OCT scans (RA: 0.66 ± 0.12 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 0.61 ± 0.33 mm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em> = 0.68; IVL: 0.64 ± 0.19 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 0.68 ± 0.22 mm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em> = 0.74). Final stent eccentricity was high with 0.62 ± 0.10 after RA and 0.61 ± 0.09 after IVL.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>RA or IVL are unable to reduce the volume of the calcified plaque. CN modulation seems to be mainly induced by the stent implantation and not by RA or IVL.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":"68 ","pages":"Pages 37-42"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of interventional treatment options for coronary calcified nodules: A sub-analysis of the ROTA.shock trial\",\"authors\":\"Florian Blachutzik ,&nbsp;Sophie Meier ,&nbsp;Melissa Blachutzik ,&nbsp;Sophia Schlattner ,&nbsp;Tommaso Gori ,&nbsp;Helen Ullrich-Daub ,&nbsp;Luise Gaede ,&nbsp;Stephan Achenbach ,&nbsp;Helge Möllmann ,&nbsp;Bogdan Chitic ,&nbsp;Adem Aksoy ,&nbsp;Georg Nickenig ,&nbsp;Maren Weferling ,&nbsp;Oliver Dörr ,&nbsp;Niklas Boeder ,&nbsp;Matthias Bayer ,&nbsp;Christian Hamm ,&nbsp;Holger Nef ,&nbsp;ROTA.shock Investigators\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.carrev.2024.05.030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The optimal treatment for coronary calcified nodules (CNs) is still unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the modification of these lesions by coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and rotational atherectomy (RA) using optical coherence tomography (OCT).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>ROTA.shock was a 1:1 randomized, prospective, double-arm multi-center non-inferiority trial that compared the use of IVL and RA with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in severely calcified lesions. In 19 of the patients out of this study CNs were detected by OCT in the target lesion and were treated by either IVL or RA.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean angle of CNs was significantly larger in final OCT scans than before RA (92 ± 17° vs. 68 ± 7°; <em>p</em> = 0.01) and IVL (89 ± 18° vs. 60 ± 10°; <em>p</em> = 0.03). The CNs were thinner upon final scans than in initial native scans (RA: 17.8 ± 7.8 mm vs. 38.6 ± 13.1 mm; <em>p</em> = 0.02; IVL: 16.5 ± 9.0 mm vs. 37.2 ± 14.3 mm; p = 0.02). Nodule volume did not differ significantly between native and final OCT scans (RA: 0.66 ± 0.12 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 0.61 ± 0.33 mm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em> = 0.68; IVL: 0.64 ± 0.19 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 0.68 ± 0.22 mm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em> = 0.74). Final stent eccentricity was high with 0.62 ± 0.10 after RA and 0.61 ± 0.09 after IVL.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>RA or IVL are unable to reduce the volume of the calcified plaque. CN modulation seems to be mainly induced by the stent implantation and not by RA or IVL.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47657,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine\",\"volume\":\"68 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 37-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1553838924005074\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1553838924005074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景冠状动脉钙化结节(CNs)的最佳治疗方法尚不明确。这项研究的目的是比较冠状动脉血管内碎石术(IVL)和旋转动脉瘤切除术(RA)利用光学相干断层扫描(OCT)改变这些病变的效果。方法ROTA.shock是一项1:1随机、前瞻性、双臂多中心非劣效性试验,比较了在严重钙化病变中使用IVL和RA与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的效果。结果在最终的 OCT 扫描中,CN 的平均角度明显大于 RA(92 ± 17° vs. 68 ± 7°;p = 0.01)和 IVL(89 ± 18° vs. 60 ± 10°;p = 0.03)前。最终扫描时,CN 比初始原位扫描时更薄(RA:17.8 ± 7.8 mm vs. 38.6 ± 13.1 mm;p = 0.02;IVL:16.5 ± 9.0 mm vs. 37.2 ± 14.3 mm;p = 0.02)。结节体积在原始扫描和最终 OCT 扫描之间没有明显差异(RA:0.66 ± 0.12 mm3 vs. 0.61 ± 0.33 mm3;p = 0.68;IVL:0.64 ± 0.19 mm3 vs. 0.68 ± 0.22 mm3;p = 0.74)。最终支架偏心率较高,RA 后为 0.62 ± 0.10,IVL 后为 0.61 ± 0.09。CN调节似乎主要是由支架植入引起的,而不是由RA或IVL引起的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of interventional treatment options for coronary calcified nodules: A sub-analysis of the ROTA.shock trial

Background

The optimal treatment for coronary calcified nodules (CNs) is still unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the modification of these lesions by coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and rotational atherectomy (RA) using optical coherence tomography (OCT).

Methods

ROTA.shock was a 1:1 randomized, prospective, double-arm multi-center non-inferiority trial that compared the use of IVL and RA with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in severely calcified lesions. In 19 of the patients out of this study CNs were detected by OCT in the target lesion and were treated by either IVL or RA.

Results

The mean angle of CNs was significantly larger in final OCT scans than before RA (92 ± 17° vs. 68 ± 7°; p = 0.01) and IVL (89 ± 18° vs. 60 ± 10°; p = 0.03). The CNs were thinner upon final scans than in initial native scans (RA: 17.8 ± 7.8 mm vs. 38.6 ± 13.1 mm; p = 0.02; IVL: 16.5 ± 9.0 mm vs. 37.2 ± 14.3 mm; p = 0.02). Nodule volume did not differ significantly between native and final OCT scans (RA: 0.66 ± 0.12 mm3 vs. 0.61 ± 0.33 mm3; p = 0.68; IVL: 0.64 ± 0.19 mm3 vs. 0.68 ± 0.22 mm3; p = 0.74). Final stent eccentricity was high with 0.62 ± 0.10 after RA and 0.61 ± 0.09 after IVL.

Conclusion

RA or IVL are unable to reduce the volume of the calcified plaque. CN modulation seems to be mainly induced by the stent implantation and not by RA or IVL.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine
Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
687
审稿时长
36 days
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine (CRM) is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original laboratory and clinical investigations related to revascularization therapies in cardiovascular medicine. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine publishes articles related to preclinical work and molecular interventions, including angiogenesis, cell therapy, pharmacological interventions, restenosis management, and prevention, including experiments conducted in human subjects, in laboratory animals, and in vitro. Specific areas of interest include percutaneous angioplasty in coronary and peripheral arteries, intervention in structural heart disease, cardiovascular surgery, etc.
期刊最新文献
Inconsistencies with reported point estimates and adjusted odds ratios. Effect of cardiac amyloidosis on outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis. Trends in surgical and transcatheter interventions for tricuspid regurgitation: A national inpatient sample analysis from 2011 to 2020. Young adults with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the Houston Methodist Young ACS-PCI Registry. ST-elevation myocardial infarction from spontaneous coronary artery dissection with high thrombus burden.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1