| Abstract | UVOD: Cilj ovog istraživanja bio je ustanoviti uspješnost i razlike perkutane koronarne intervencije (PCI) koristeći balon obložen lijekom (DCB) u liječenju bolesnika s akutnim koronarnim sindromom (AKS) i kroničnim koronarnim sindromom (KKS). ----- ISPITANICI I METODE: Ova retrospektivna studija provedena ja na 399 bolesnika koji su liječeni DCB-om u periodu između veljače 2011. i listopada 2019. Svi klinički podatci su prikupljeni iz bolničke digitalne baze podataka. Bolesnici su raspoređeni u dvije skupine, oni s AKS-om te oni s KKS-om. ----- REZULTATI: Od ukupno 399 ispitanika, 190 (47,62%) ih je bilo podvrgnuto hitnoj PCI (AKS grupa), dok je 209 (52,38%) bilo elektivno (KKS grupa). Između grupa nisu ustanovljene bitnije razlike u provođenju inicijalne procedure, osim češće potrebe za implantacijom stenta u AKS grupi (9,47% vs 3,83%, p=0,022). Angiografskim praćenjem nakon prosječno 1,01 godine, između grupa nisu ustanovljene značajne razlike u prevalenciji restenoze (prosječno 6,52%), tromboze (prosječno 0,75%), revaskularizacije ciljane lezije ili arterije (prosječno 6,27 % i 4,76%). Prosječno kliničko praćenje iznosilo je 2,20 godine, unutar kojeg nisu ustanovljene značajne razlike u potrebi za hitnom rehospitalizacijom (22,6% vs 22,01%) i smrtnosti (1,26% vs 3,14%). ----- ZAKLJUČAK: PCI koristeći DCB pokazao se kao uspješna metoda liječenja bolesnika s AKS-om i KKS-om bez značajnih razlika u angiografskim rezultatima i kliničkim ishodima. |
| Abstract (english) | INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess efficacy and differences in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug coated balloon (DCB) in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). ----- PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 399 patients treated with DCB between February 2011 and October 2019. All baseline and follow-up clinical data were extracted from the hospital digital database. Patients were stratified in two groups, those with ACS or CCS. ----- RESULTS: In a total of 399 patients, 190 (47.62%) were in the ACS group and 209 (52.38%) in the CCS group. There were no significant differences in procedural characteristics besides for a higher rate of bailout stenting in the ACS group (9.47% vs 3.83%, p=0.022). Mean angiographic follow-up of 1.01 years revealed no significant differences between the groups in the prevalence of restenosis (6.52%), thrombosis (0.75%), and revascularization of the target lesion, or artery (6.27% and 4.76%). After a mean clinical follow-up of 2.20 years, no significant differences were found in a need for an emergency rehospitalization (22.6% vs 22.01%) and mortality (1.26% vs 3.14%). ----- CONCLUSION: PCI using DCB shows to be a feasible strategy in treating patients with ACS and CCS without significant differences in angiographic and clinical outcomes. |
