Long-term outcome of intracoronary microstent implantation: Lesion matched comparison with Palmaz-Schatz stent

Abstract

We performed a lesion matched comparison of AVE Microstent and Palmaz‐Schatz stent implants with 6 month follow‐up angiography to compare the occurrence of restenosis. Thirty‐three pairs of lesions were matched for lesion location, ACC/AHA lesion type, reference diameter, lesion length, and angiographic descriptors. Age, sex, clinical profile, and indication for stenting were comparable. Quantitative coronary analysis before and after the procedure was comparable in the two groups but minimum lumen diameter (MLD) at follow‐up was less with Microstent—2.01 ± 1.01 mm than Palmaz‐Schatz stent—2.43 ± 0.96 mm (P = 0.05). Binary restenosis was present in 33% and 21% and was diffuse in 55% and 29% of the two groups, respectively. Typical angina at follow‐up was more frequent with Microstent (36%) than Palmaz‐Schatz stent (15%; P = 0.038). When implanted in lesions of similar complexity, Microstent yields similar post procedure angiographic results but smaller MLD at follow‐up and more frequent angina than Palmaz‐Schatz stent.