[Endoprosthetic repair of the abdominal aorta in patients with infrarenal aneurysm and unfavourable anatomy of its proximal neck].

Analysed herein are immediate and remote results of endoprosthetic repair of the abdominal aorta in patients with unfavourable anatomy of its proximal neck. Group I (Study Group) was composed of 31 patients with unfavourable anatomy of the proximal neck, the control group (Group II) comprised a total of 52 patients with no unfavourable anatomical factors. The criteria of assessment were as follows: technical success, adequate position of the endograft, frequency of the development of various endoleaks, duration of the operation and hospital stay, lethality in the remote period, and necessity of secondary interventions. Technical success of endoprosthetic repair was achieved in 100% of patients in the both groups. An adequate position by the proximal end of the coated portion of the endograft was observed in 27 (87.1%) patients of Group I and in 51 (98.1%) patients of the control group (p=0.08). Secondary postdilatation of the endograft's body in the proximal neck was statistically more often performed in the study group of patients. The duration of the operation and hospital stay in the compared groups had no statistically significant differences. In the remote period, patients with unfavourable morphology of the proximal neck were found to develop type I-A endoleaks into the cavity of the aneurysm. By other evaluated criteria such as the total survival rate, secondary interventions, graft migration, type I-B, II and V endoleaks no statistically significant differences were revealed. It was concluded that endoprosthetic repair of the abdominal aorta in patients with unfavourable anatomy of the proximal neck of the aneurysm is associated with admissible immediate, short- and long-term outcomes. Longer follow up is required in order to more adequately asses the reliability of the obtained findings.

[Twelve months results of percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with ischemic heart disease combined with diabetes mellitus using sirolimus and everolimus covered stents].

We included into this study 112 patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) and concomitant type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) subjected to percutaneous coronary interventions with stenting. Everolimus and sirolimus eluting stents (EES and SES) were implanted in 54 (group 1) and 58 (group 2) patients, respectively. After 12 months in groups 1 and 2 rates of repeat target lesion revascularizations (TLR) were 5.5 and 8.6% (odds ratio - OR - 0.62, 95% confidence interval - CI - 0.14- 2.74, p = 0.72); acute myocardial infarctions (MI) - 3.7 and 5.2% (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.11- 4.4, p = 0.94); deaths - 1.85 and 1.7% (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.1- 17.6, p = 1.0), respectively. There was no significant difference between groups by rate of unfavorable cardiac events (composite of cardiac death, nonfatal MI, and clinically indicated TLR) - 11.1 and 15.5% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.225- 2.059, p = 0.69). Rates of stent thrombosis also did not differ (1.85 and 3.4% in groups 1 and 2, respectively; OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.05- 6.0; p = 0.94). Thus the use of EES and SES in patients with IHD and type-2 DM was equally effective.

[Coronary stenting in patients with ischemic heart disease with multivessel involvement of coronary vascular bed and low Syntax score].

MATERIAL AND METHODS: We followed 619 patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) and multivessel involvement of coronary arteries: 317 patients subjected to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG, group 1) and 302 patients subjected to multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI, group 2) with implantation of drug eluting stents. Both groups had comparable clinical characteristics. During hospitalization we registered deaths and unfavorable cardiological and cerebrovascular events. In remote period after revascularization we assessed survival, angina recurrences and related repeat revascularizations, and rate of severe cardiovascular complications (composite of deaths, acute myocardial infarctions [AMI], stroke, and repeat myocardial revascularizations). RESULTS: During hospitalization there were no significant differences between groups by parameters studied: death rate was 1.7 and 0.9%, that of AMI 2.6 and 1.9%, of stroke 0.9% and 0, of composite of death, AMI, and stroke 5.1 and 1.9% (p = 0.37) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Survival in remote period was 90.2 (group 1) and 92.7% (group 2). Comparison of Kaplan-Meier survival curves also revealed no significant differences between groups. Angina recurrence/repeat revascularization took place in 54 (17.0%) and in 64 (21.2%) patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.128). Repeat revascularization was carried out in 32 of 54 patients (59.3%) in group 1 and in 58 Of 64 patients (90.6%) in group 2. Rate of severe unfavorable events during whole period of follow up was 33.1% in group 1 and 30.5% in group 2 (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In IHD patients with multivessel coronary artery involvement and low Syntax Score immediate and long term (5 year) results of stenting with drug eluting stents are not inferior to results of CABG.