Introduction. Published Stress and Benestent studies, obtained in selected
populations under technical conditions that do not reflect present practice
with intercoronary stenting showed a clinical benefit of coronary stenting
.
Objective. To assess clinical longterm outcome of coronary stenting in curr
ent practice and to compare coronary lesions with and without Stress/Benest
ent criteria.
Methods. 216 consecutive patients with successful placement of 279 stents i
n 256 lesions and no major in-hospital events. Mean clinical follow-up was
16.7 +/- 10.4 months. Standard technique included seven types, high pressur
e balloon inflation (15.6 +/- 2.2 atm) and poststenting treatment of four w
eeks with aspirin and ticlopidine.
Results. Cumulative rates of target lesion revascularization were 9.7% at 6
months, 13,5% at 12 months and 15,1% at 18, 24 and 36 months. Cumulative r
ates of combined clinical end-point (death, myocardial infarction and targe
t lesion revascularization) were 11.3%, at 6 months, 13.9% at 1 year, 19.3%
at 2 years and 21.1% at 3 years. No Stress/Benestent lesions were 193; 75%
, and had a higher incidence of target lesion revascularization (17.9 vs 7.
5%, Log Rank = 0.015) and combined clinical endpoint (22.4 vs 10%, Log Rank
= 0.025), than Stress/Benestent lesions.
Conclusion. Coronary stenting of no Stress/Benestent lesions have a less fa
vourable clinical longterm outcome. However, clinical outcome in a nonselec
ted population at the present time is similar to the old Stress/Benestent s
tudies, probably because of technical improvements.