Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A comparison of directional atherectomy with coronary angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. The CAVEAT Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Directional coronary atherectomy is a new technique of coronary revascularization by which atherosclerotic plaque is excised and retrieved from target lesions. With respect to the rate of restenosis and clinical outcomes, it is not known how this procedure compares with balloon angioplasty, which relies on dilation of the plaque and vessel wall. We compared the rate of restenosis after angioplasty with that after atherectomy.

METHODS: At 35 sites in the United States and Europe, 1012 patients were randomly assigned to either atherectomy (512 patients) or angioplasty (500 patients). The patients underwent coronary angiography at base line and again after six months; the paired angiograms were quantitatively assessed at one laboratory by investigators unaware of the treatment assignments.

RESULTS: Stenosis was reduced to 50 percent or less more often with atherectomy than with angioplasty (89 percent vs. 80 percent; P < 0.001), and there was a greater immediate increase in vessel caliber (1.05 vs. 0.86 mm, P < 0.001). This was accompanied by a higher rate of early complications (11 percent vs. 5 percent, P < 0.001) and higher in-hospital costs ($11,904 vs $10,637; P = 0.006). At six months, the rate of restenosis was 50 percent for atherectomy and 57 percent for angioplasty (P = 0.06). However, the probability of death or myocardial infarction within six months was higher in the atherectomy group (8.6 percent vs. 4.6 percent, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS: Removing coronary artery plaque with atherectomy led to a larger luminal diameter and a small reduction in angiographic restenosis, the latter being confined largely to the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. However, atherectomy led to a higher rate of early complications, increased cost, and no apparent clinical benefit after six months of follow-up.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app