Directional atherectomy versus balloon angioplasty for coronary ostial and nonostial left anterior descending coronary artery lesions: results from a randomized multicenter trial. The CAVEAT-I investigators. Coronary Angioplasty Versus Excisional Atherectomy Trial
JD Boehrer,
SG Ellis,
K Pieper,
DR Holmes,
GP Keeler,
D Debowey,
AT Chapekis,
F Leya,
MR Mooney,
RS Gottlieb,
et al.
Department of Cardiology and Center for Thrombosis and Vascular Biology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Ohio, USA.
OBJECTIVES. We hypothesized that atherectomy would be superior to balloon angioplasty for ostial and nonostial left anterior descending coronary artery lesions. BACKGROUND. Balloon angioplasty of ostial coronary artery lesions has been associated with a lower procedural success rate and a higher rate of complications and of restenosis than angioplasty of nonostial stenoses. Directional coronary atherectomy has been proposed as an alternative therapy for ostial lesions. METHODS. In the Coronary Angioplasty Versus Excisional Atherectomy Trial (CAVEAT-I), 1,012 patients were randomized to undergo either procedure; 563 patients had proximal left anterior descending coronary artery lesions, of which 74 were ostial. We compared balloon angioplasty with directional atherectomy for early and 6-month results for ostial as well as nonostial proximal left anterior descending coronary artery lesions. RESULTS. Directional atherectomy led to an initially higher gain in minimal lumen diameter for ostial lesions (1.13 vs. 0.56 mm, respectively, p < 0.001) but a higher rate of adjudicated non-Q wave myocardial infarction (24% vs. 13%, respectively, p < 0.001) than balloon angioplasty and no improvement in restenosis rates (48% vs. 46%, respectively). In the nonostial proximal left anterior descending coronary artery lesions, angiographic restenosis was reduced (51% vs. 66%, p = 0.012), but this was also associated with a higher rate of periprocedural myocardial infarction (8% vs. 2%, p = 0.008 by site and 24% vs. 8%, p < 0.001 by adjudication) and no difference in the need for subsequent coronary artery bypass surgery (7.3% vs. 8.4%, respectively) or repeat percutaneous coronary intervention (24% vs. 26%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS. For ostial left anterior descending coronary artery stenoses, both procedures yielded similar rates of initial success and restenosis, but atherectomy was associated with more non-Q wave myocardial infarction. In this trial the predominant angiographic benefit (increased early gain and less angiographic restenosis) of atherectomy for the left anterior descending coronary artery was in proximal nonostial lesions. However, the tradeoffs for this angiographic advantage were more in-hospital myocardial infarctions and no decrease in clinical restenosis.
