Objectives: This study sought to determine whether preprocedural lesion morphology differentially affects the outcome of directional coronary atherectomy versus standard balloon angioplasty.
Background: Despite previous studies (Canadian Coronary Atherectomy Trial [CCAT]/Coronary Angioplasty Verus Excisional Atherectomy Trial [CAVEAT]), directional coronary atherectomy continues to be recommended on the basis of lesion-specific features, although the validity of this approach has never been proved.
Methods: A retrospective, subgroup analysis of the CCAT data base (group average +/- SD) was performed.
Results: In the long term (6 months), both procedures were equally successful in the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery (directional atherectomy 0.62 +/- 0.70 mm vs. coronary angioplasty 0.70 +/- 0.72 mm, p = NS), with atherectomy tending to perform best in relatively "simple" lesions (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association [ACC/AHA] type A: atherectomy 0.57 +/- 0.70 mm vs. angioplasty 0.50 +/- 0.77 mm; ACC/AHA type B1: atherectomy 0.65 +/- 0.68 mm vs. angioplasty 0.60 +/- 0.68 mm) and those with moderate dystrophic calcification (atherectomy 0.79 +/- 0.56 mm vs. angioplasty 0.45 +/- 0.73 mm). Although greatest minimal lumen diameter gains were seen in larger (> 3 mm) coronary arteries (atherectomy 0.76 +/- 0.62 mm vs angioplasty 0.80 +/- 0.72 mm, p = NS) and those with severe obstruction (preprocedural minimal lumen diameter < 1.0 mm: atherectomy 0.80 +/- 0.62 mm vs. angioplasty 0.84 +/- 0.63 mm, p = NS), neither technique was superior, and eccentric stenoses (symmetry index < 0.5) had similar outcomes (atherectomy 0.59 +/- 0.49 mm vs. angioplasty 0.62 +/- 0.65 mm, p = NS).
Conclusions: These data refute many preconceptions regarding the choice of directional coronary atherectomy on the basis of anatomic criteria.