Abstract
Step-up-approach rotational atherectomy has been widely recognized in the treatment of severe calcified plaques. As an alternative, the rota-tripsy procedure is a novel strategy for the modification of calcification lesions. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of rota-tripsy and step-up-approach rotational atherectomy, given the limited clinical data available. Clinical data of 3652 patients with coronary calcification were retrospectively collected from February 2021 to February 2024. The cases were divided into two groups based on the technical approach. The primary efficacy endpoint was procedural success (stent expansion rate > 70% and no hospital major adverse cardiac events [MACEs]). The primary safety endpoint was the absence of serious angiographic complications and 30 days MACEs. A total of 37 patients (38 calcified lesions) screened and included in the study, with 18 cases (19 lesions) in group A and 19 cases in group B. The results showed no significant differences in primary efficacy endpoint. However, group A recorded a lower incidence of angiographic complications (P = 0.02) and shorter dose area product and fluoroscopy/interval times compared with group B (P < 0.01). For management of severe coronary calcification, both rota-tripsy and step-up-approach rotational atherectomy had favorable short-term clinical results; however, rota-tripsy provided improved safety and efficiency.