ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the safety and efficacy of direct and remedial rotational atherectomy in the treatment of heavily calcified coronary artery lesions.Methods We retrospectively reviewed 58 patients admitted in the Shanghai Chest Hospital and Liaocheng People Hospital from May 2012 to July 2015 who had received stent implantation and rotational atherectomy.The 58 patients were divided into two groups which were the direct atherectomy group (n =27) and the remedial atherectomy group (n =31).General clinical date,lesion and procedural characteristics,intraoperative complications,in-hospital and follow-up MACCE were compared between the two groups.Results There were no differences between the two groups in general clinical date intraoperative complications,amount of contrast agent used,proceduraltime,rates of in-hospital and follow-up MACCE.Nevertheless,compared with the direct artherectomy group,the remedial group had more number of balloon dilations during procedure [3 (1,5) vs.2 (1,2),P ＜ 0.001] and higher peak cardiac troponin levels [1.1 (0.3,3.0) μg/L vs.0.5 (0.1,2.3) μg/L,P =0.032].Conclusions Remedial rotational atherectomy with drug-eluting stent had the same safety and efficacy as direct atheretomy with drug-eluting stent in treating patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions.It is reasonable and safe to transform routine PCI to remedial rotational atherectomy when the 2.0 mm semi compliant balloon or/and 2.5 mm non-compliant balloon cannot pass through or dilate the lesions.