Background: To compare outcomes of bailout and planned rotational atherectomy (RA) in the treatment of severe calcified coronary lesions.
Methods: Data of patients treated with RA from 2017 to 2018 at a single-center registry were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were divided into planned RA and bailout RA groups, data between two groups were compared.
Results: A total of 190 patients were included in this study, 138 patients received planned RA and 52 patients received bailout RA. Baseline clinical characteristics had no significant differences between groups. The number of implanted stents and total stents length were similar. But the number of balloon (1.6 ± 0.8 vs. 2.7 ± 1.3, P < 0.001), procedure time (83.5 ± 26.2 vs. 100.8 ± 36.4 min, P = 0.007), fluoroscopy volume (941 ± 482 vs. 1227 ± 872 mGy, P = 0.012] and contrast amount (237 ± 62 vs. 275 ± 90 ml, P = 0.003) were all lower in planned RA group. Planned RA had a higher procedural success rate (99.3% vs. 92.3%, P = 0.007) and a lower complication incidence (4.3% vs. 17.3%, P = 0.009). But the primary outcomes at 3 years (9.2 and 16.6%, log rank p = 0.24) had no difference between groups.
Conclusions: For severe coronary artery calcification, although planned RA did not improved the long term prognosis compared with bailout RA, but it can improve the immediate procedural success rate, reduce the incidence of complications, the procedure time and the volume of contrast.
Keywords: Bailout rotational atherectomy; Planned rotational atherectomy; Severe coronary calcified lesions.