COMPARISON OF BAILOUT VERSUS ELECTIVE STENTING - TIME TO REASSESS OURBENCHMARKS OF OUTCOME

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of elective and bailout stenting in an era of improved stent deployment techniques and antithrombotic therapy. We retrospectively analysed 136 consecuti ve patients undergoing stent implantation over a 15 mo period. There w as no significant difference in the follow-up duration, length of hosp ital stay, or the total incidence of major complications between the t wo groups, Bailout stenting, as compared to elective stenting, was not associated with an increased incidence of in-hospital (no death vs, 1 .4%, 4.6% non-Q myocardial infarction vs, 0%, 7.7% vascular complicati ons vs. 7.0%) or late complications (no death vs, 1.4%, no non-Q myoca rdial infarction vs. 2.8%, 3.1% repeat angioplasty vs, 5.6%, 1.5% coro nary artery bypass surgery vs, 1.4%). Stents can be implanted in cases of failed angioplasty with a success rate similar to that of elective stent implantation with a low incidence of complications and equivale nt clinical outcome. (C) 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.