RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become the primary treatment for coronary artery disease. However, while PCI effectively addresses severe stenosis or occlusive lesions in target vessels, the progression of non-target vessel plaque remains a critical determinant of long-term patient prognosis. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of non-target vascular plaque progression on prognosis after PCI for ISR. METHODS: This study included 195 patients diagnosed with ISR and multivessel disease who underwent successful PCI with drug-eluting stent (DES) placement, along with intraoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT) assessment of the culprit stent. Subsequent rechecked coronary angiography categorized eligible patients into non-target lesion progression (N-TLP) and no-N-TLP groups. We evaluated the baseline morphological characteristics of N-TLP by OCT and investigated the relationship between N-TLP, non-culprit vessel-related major adverse cardiovascular events (NCV-MACE), and pan-vascular disease-related clinical events (PVD-CE) incidence. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that diabetes mellitus (OR 3.616, 95% CI: 1.735-7.537; P = 0.001), uric acid level (OR 1.005, 95% CI: 1.001-1.009; P = 0.006), in-stent neoatherosclerosis (ISNA) (OR 1.334, 95% CI: 1.114-1.985; P = 0.047) and heterogeneous neointima morphology (OR 2.48, 95% CI: 1.18-5.43; P = 0.019) were independent predictors for N-TLP. Furthermore, N-TLP was associated with a high incidence of NCV-MACE (19.4% vs 6.9%, P = 0.009) and PVD-CE (83.9% [95% CI: 79.7%-88.3%] vs 93.1% [95% CI: 88.4%-98.0%], P = 0.038) after PCI in ISR patients. CONCLUSION: Diabetes, uric acid levels, ISNA, and heterogeneous neointima are predictive factors for subsequent rapid plaque progression, with N-TLP exacerbating the incidence of NCV-MACE and PVD-CE after PCI.
Asunto(s)
Reestenosis Coronaria , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios de Seguimiento , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Angiografía Coronaria , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stents (DES) are two widely used treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR). Focal and non-focal types of ISR affect the clinical outcomes. The present study aims to compare DES reimplantation versus DCB angioplasty in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with focal ISR and non-focal ISR lesions. METHODS: Patients with ISR lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were retrospectively evaluated and divided into DES group and DCB group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) at 24 months follow up. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance the baseline characteristics. RESULTS: For focal ISR, TLF was comparable in the DES and DCB groups at 24 months of follow-up (Before PSM, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-1.27; p = 0.244; After PSM, HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.40-1.73; p = 0.625). For non-focal ISR, TLF was significantly decreased in DES compared with DCB group (Before PSM, HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.29-0.63; p < 0.001; After PSM, HR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.19-0.59; p < 0.001), which was mainly attributed to the lower incidence of clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) (Before PSM, HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.26-0.59; p < 0.001; After PSM, HR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.15-0.54; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical outcomes for DES and DCB treatment are similar in focal type of ISR lesions. For non-focal ISR, the treatment of DES showed a significant decrease in TLF which was mainly attributed to a lower incidence of CD-TLR.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Angiografía Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Anciano , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/cirugía , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/métodos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angiografía Coronaria/métodos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentaciónRESUMEN
In-stent restenosis (ISR) is the gradual narrowing of the stented coronary segment, presenting as angina or leading to an acute myocardial infarction. Although its incidence has decreased with the use of newer drug-eluting stents (DES), it still carries significant mortality and morbidity risks. We compared the 2 most common interventions for managing DES-related ISR: drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and DES. Electronic databases were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing DCB with DES in patients with DES-ISR. The Mantel-Haenszel method with a random-effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios. Five trials comprising 1,100 patients (577 in DCB and 523 in DES group) were included in the final study. The mean follow-up was 42 months. DCB was found to have a higher risk for target lesion revascularization (risk ratio 1.41, p = 0.02) compared with DES. No difference was observed in all-cause mortality, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, or stroke between the 2 intervention arms. In conclusion, management of DES-ISR with DCB has a higher risk of target lesion revascularization compared with re-stenting with DES. The 2 therapeutic interventions are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety profile.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Humanos , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Materiales Biocompatibles RevestidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of drug-eluting stents and drug-eluting balloons in treating in-stent restenosis. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted from January to February 2022, and comprised literature search on PubMed, ProQuest, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases with relevant key words to locate randomised controlled trials and observational studies published between 2000 and 2022 that compared drugeluting balloons and drug-eluting stents in the treatment of in-stent restenosis. The outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke and target vessel revascularisation. The pooled risk ratio for each outcome was analysed. Data was analysed using Review Manager 5.1. RESULTS: Of the 1,105 studies identified, 11(0.99%) were analysed in detail; 7(63.6%) randomised controlled trials and 4(36.4%) observational studies. There were 2,437 patients with in-stent restenosis. There was no significant difference between drug-eluting balloons and drugeluting stents with respect to all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction and major adverse cardiovascular events (p>0.05). Drug-eluting stents significantly caused more target vessel revascularisation compared to drugeluting balloons (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Except for target vessel revascularisation, the drug-eluting balloons and drug-eluting stents had no difference in terms of clinical outcomes related to in-stent restenosis patients.
Asunto(s)
Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Humanos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In-stent restenosis (ISR) is seen in up to 20% of cases and is the primary cause of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) failure. With the use of re-stenting with a drug-eluting stent (DES), plain old balloon angioplasty (BA) use is decreasing. We aim to compare the efficacy and safety profile of DES over BA in the management of ISR. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DES to BA for coronary ISR. The mantel-Haenszel method with a random effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR). RESULTS: Four trials comprising 912 patients (543 in DES and 369 in the BA group) were included in the final study. The mean follow-up was 45 months. DES was found to be superior with a lower requirement of target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31-0.64, p-value <0.0001), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR: 0.59, 95%CI: 0.44-0.78, p-value 0.0002) compared to BA. However, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion thrombosis were not different between the two intervention arms. CONCLUSION: DES was found to be superior to BA for the management of coronary ISR with a reduction in the risk of TLR and TVR. No difference in mortality, risk of MI, or target lesion thrombosis was observed between the two interventions.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/métodos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The impact of glycemic control in the risk of stent failure in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is currently unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to study whether poor glycemic control is associated with a higher risk of stent failure in subjects with T2D. METHODS: This observational study included all patients in Sweden with T2D who underwent implantation of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) during 2010 to 2020. The exposure variable was the updated mean of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Individuals were stratified by glycemic control, with HbA1c 6.1% to 7.0% (43-53 mmol/mol) as the reference group. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of stent failure (in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis). The main result was analyzed in a complete cases model. Sensitivity analyses were performed for missing data and a model with death as a competing risk. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 52,457 individuals (70,453 DES). The number of complete cases was 24,411 (29,029 DES). The median follow-up was 6.4 years. The fully adjusted HR was 1.10 (95% CI: 0.80-1.52) for HbA1c of ≤5.5% (≤37 mmol/mol), 1.02 (95% CI: 0.85-1.23) for HbA1c of 5.6% to 6.0% (38-42 mmol/mol), 1.25 (95% CI: 1.11-1.41) for HbA1c of 7.1% to 8.0% (54-64 mmol/mol), 1.30 (95% CI: 1.13-1.51) for HbA1c of 8.1% to 9.0% (65-75 mmol/mol), 1.46 (95% CI: 1.21-1.76) for HbA1c of 9.1% to 10.0% (76-86 mmol/mol), and 1.33 (95% CI: 1.06-1.66) for HbA1c of ≥10.1% (≥87 mmol/mol). Sensitivity analyses did not change the main result. CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant association between poor glycemic control and a higher risk of stent failure driven by in-stent restenosis.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Hemoglobina Glucada , Control Glucémico , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangre , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Hemoglobina Glucada/análisis , Hemoglobina Glucada/metabolismo , Suecia/epidemiología , Control Glucémico/métodos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/sangre , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Falla de Prótesis , Glucemia/análisis , Glucemia/metabolismoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients are still suboptimal, and it is unclear if diabetic patients might derive a benefit from the use of drug-coated balloons. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of diabetes mellitus on the outcomes of patients undergoing PCI with sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) MagicTouch (Concept Medical, India). METHODS: We conducted a subgroup analysis of the prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated EASTBOURNE registry, evaluating the performance of MagicTouch SCB in patients with and without diabetes. The study primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12-month follow-up. Secondary clinical endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACE), death, myocardial infarction (MI), and BARC 2-5 bleedings. RESULTS: Among 2,083 enrolled patients, a total of 864 suffered from diabetes (41.5%). Patients with diabetes had a numerically higher occurrence of TLR (6.5% vs. 4.7% HR 1.38, 95%CI 0.91-2.08), all-cause death (3.8% vs. 2.6%, HR 1.81, 95%CI 0.95-3.46), and MACE (12.2% vs. 8.9%; HR 1.26 95%CI 0.92-1.74). The incidence of spontaneous MI was significantly higher among diabetic patients (3.4% vs. 1.5%, HR 2.15 95%CI 1.09-4.25); bleeding events did not significantly differ. The overall incidence of TLR was higher among in-stent restenosis (ISR) as compared to de-novo coronary lesions, irrespectively from diabetes status. CONCLUSIONS: In the EASTBOURNE DIABETES registry, diabetic patients treated with the MagicTouch SCB did not have a significant increase in TLR when compared to non-diabetic patients; moreover, diabetic status did not affect the study device performance in terms of TLR, in both de-novo lesions and ISR.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/inducido químicamente , Sistema de Registros , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with a high rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) after de novo coronary artery percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether patients with DM undergoing PCI for in-stent restenosis (ISR) experience a similar heightened risk of MACE is not known. Hence, we sought to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with and without DM undergoing PCI for ISR. METHODS: Patients undergoing first episode ISR PCI between January 2015 and December 2021 were included. The primary outcome of interest was MACE (all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target lesion revascularization [TVR]) at 1-year. RESULTS: A total of 3156 patients (56.7% with DM) underwent PCI for ISR during the study period. Patients with DM were younger, more likely to be female, and had a higher prevalence of comorbidities. At 1-year follow-up, DM was associated with a higher rate of MACE (22.4% vs. 18.7%, unadjusted HR 2.03, 95%CI(1.27-3.25), p = 0.003). All-cause mortality and MI were significantly more frequent among people with DM at 1-year follow-up. The rate of TVR was similar in both groups (17.9% vs. 16.0%, unadjusted HR 1.14, 95%CI (0.94-1.37), p = 0.180). On adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in the rate of MACE (AHR 1.07, 95%CI(0.90 - -1.29), p = 0.444), all-cause death (AHR 1.54, 95%CI(0.93-2.54), p = 0.095) or MI (AHR 1.10, 95%CI(0.74-1.63), p = 0.652). CONCLUSION: ISR PCI in patients with DM was associated with a higher rate of MACE at 1-year follow-up. However, this increased risk was no longer significant after adjusting for baseline characteristics.
Asunto(s)
Reestenosis Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/etiología , Constricción Patológica , Sistema de Registros , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) remains clinically relevant in the contemporary era of drug-eluting stent percutaneous coronary interventions (DES-PCI), especially in the setting of in-stent restenosis (ISR). Our goal was to assess the outcomes of ISR patients in a large prospective registry. METHODS: A total of 2329 consecutive patients with ISR-PCI (675 using DEB and 1654 with DES) were treated in our medical centre from 2010 to 2021. Clinical end points included mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year. Clinical outcomes were adjusted for multiple confounders. RESULTS: Mean ages (65.9 ± 11.0 vs 66.1 ± 10.5; P = 0.73) and percentages of female patients (16.6% vs 18.2%; P = 0.353) were similar between both ISR groups. Patients treated with DEB for ISR suffered more from diabetes, hypertension, and previous myocardial infarction (P < 0.01 for all) and presented more frequently with acute coronary syndrome (40.0% vs 34.4%; P = 0.01) compared with patients treated with DES for ISR. One-year MACE was significantly higher in the DEB ISR-PCI group (23.4% vs 19.6%; P = 0.002) compared to the DES ISR-PCI group, but no significant differences in mortality were observed at 1 year between the groups. After adjustment for multiple confounders, DEB ISR-PCI was not associated with increased MACE at 1 year (P = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: In our large experience, patients treated with DEB for ISR-PCI have higher baseline risk and sustained increased MACE rates compared with DES ISR-PCI patients. After adjustment for confounding variables, clinical outcomes are similar between the groups at 1 year after PCI.
Asunto(s)
Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Sistema de Registros , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Anciano , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Prospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/métodos , Estudios de SeguimientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention have improved with the use of drug-eluting stents, but data beyond 10 years are limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing sirolimus-eluting stent implantation with follow-up beyond 10 years and to determine the impact of clinical and angiographic characteristics on long-term prognosis. METHODSâANDâRESULTS: The clinical outcomes of 885 patients who had undergone sirolimus-eluting stent implantation at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Primary endpoints included in the analysis were clinically driven target lesion revascularization (cTLR) and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Univariate and multivariate nominal logistic regression was used for data analysis. The incidence rates of cTLR and TLR beyond 10 years after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation were 16.4% and 36.8%, respectively, with cTLR tending to decrease beyond 10 years. Acute coronary syndrome was a predominant trigger for cTLR. Age, statin use, and stent restenosis emerged as predictors of cTLR within 10 years, but no significant predictors other than age were identified beyond 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Events continue to occur beyond 10 years after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation, with a trend toward an increase in acute coronary syndromes. It is important to be vigilant about the occurrence of acute coronary syndromes during long-term follow-up.
Asunto(s)
Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Sirolimus , Humanos , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Anciano , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de Tiempo , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the predictive value of the Systemic Immune Inflammation Index (SII) in determining in-stent restenosis (ISR) likelihood in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: The study enrolled 903 ACS patients undergoing PCI, categorized into ISR (+) and ISR (-) groups based on control coronary angiography results. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and angiographic-procedural characteristics were systematically compared. RESULTS: The ISR (+) group encompassed 264 individuals (29.2%), while the ISR (-) group comprised 639 individuals (70.8%). Patients had a mean age of 55.8â ±â 10.2 years, with 69% being male. The ISR (+) group had higher diabetes and smoking prevalence and notably larger stent dimensions. Lab parameters showed significantly elevated creatinine, total cholesterol, red cell distribution width, white blood cell and neutrophil counts, SII index and C-reactive protein (CRP) in the ISR (+) group, while lymphocyte levels were lower. Binary logistic regression identified stent diameter (odds ratio [OR]: 0.598, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.383-0.935; P â =â 0.024), stent length (OR: 1.166, 95% CI: 1.132-1.200; P â <â 0.001), creatinine (OR: 0.366, 95% CI: 0.166-0.771; P â =â 0.003), CRP (OR: 1.075, 95% CI: 1.042-1.110; P â =â 0.031), and SII index (OR: 1.014, 95% CI: 1.001-1.023; P â <â 0.001) as independent ISR predictors. CONCLUSION: The SII index exhibits potential as a predictive marker for ISR in ACS patients post-PCI, indicating systemic inflammation and heightened restenosis risk. Integrating the SII index into risk models could identify high-risk patients for targeted interventions.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Reestenosis Coronaria , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Femenino , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Factores de Riesgo , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/etiología , Creatinina , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversos , Stents/efectos adversos , Proteína C-Reactiva/análisis , Inflamación , Constricción Patológica , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Recurrent in-stent restenosis (Re-ISR) remains a therapeutic challenge. We aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics, treatment, and long-term outcomes in patients with Re-ISR compared with those with first-time ISR (First-ISR). This retrospective study consecutively enrolled patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ISR in Fuwai Hospital between January 2017 and December 2018. Re-ISR was defined as a second event of ISR after a previous successful treatment of the ISR lesion. The primary outcome was defined as a composite of all-cause death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. A total of 2,006 patients (2,154 lesions) with ISR underwent successful PCI were enrolled and categorized into 2 groups: the Re-ISR group (246 patients/259 lesions) and the First-ISR group (1,760 patients/1,895 lesions). During a mean follow-up of 36 months, the primary outcomes occurred in 80 patients (32.5%) in the Re-ISR group and 349 patients (19.3%) in the First-ISR group (p <0.001 by log-rank test), major driven by spontaneous myocardial infarction (4.9% vs 2.7%, p = 0.049) and repeat revascularization (30.1% vs 16.5%, p <0.001). The multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that Re-ISR was independently associated with a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio 1.88, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.53, p <0.001) and repeated revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio 2.09, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 2.84, p <0.001). The relation remained consistent after the propensity score analysis. In conclusion, in the present cohort of patients who underwent PCI for ISR, Re-ISR was significantly associated with a higher risk of long-term outcomes than First-ISR.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/cirugía , Reestenosis Coronaria/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/cirugía , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Factores de Riesgo , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Background In-stent restenosis (ISR) is commonly encountered even in the era of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There is a paucity of data on the comparative outcomes of PCI for ISR lesions versus de novo lesions. Methods and Results An electronic search was conducted for MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase through August 2022 for studies comparing the clinical outcomes after PCI for ISR versus de novo lesions. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The final analysis included 12 studies, with a total of 708 391 patients, of whom 71 353 (10.3%) underwent PCI for ISR. The weighted follow-up duration was 29.1 months. Compared with de novo lesions, PCI for ISR was associated with a higher incidence of major adverse cardiac events (odds ratio [OR], 1.31 [95% CI, 1.18-1.46]). There was no difference on a subgroup analysis of chronic total occlusion lesions versus none (Pinteraction=0.69). PCI for ISR was associated with a higher incidence of all-cause mortality (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.02-1.04]), myocardial infarction (OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.11-1.29]), target vessel revascularization (OR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.29-1.55]), and stent thrombosis (OR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.11-1.87]), but no difference in cardiovascular mortality (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.90-1.20]). Conclusions PCI for ISR is associated with higher incidence of adverse cardiac events compared with PCI for de novo lesions. Future efforts should be directed toward prevention of ISR and exploring novel treatment strategies for ISR lesions.
Asunto(s)
Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Stents/efectos adversos , Constricción Patológica , Resultado del Tratamiento , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversosRESUMEN
We retrospectively examined the feasibility of paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty for de novo stenosis in large coronary vessels (LV; pre- or postprocedural reference vessel diameter ≥ 2.75 mm) in comparison with placement of drug-eluting stents (DESs).Consecutive de novo stenotic lesions in the LV electively and successfully treated with either PCB (n = 73) or DESs (n = 81) from January 2016 to December 2018 at our center were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence of target lesion failure (TLF), including cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. The impact of PCB on TLF was examined using Cox proportional hazards models by including 39 variables. The secondary endpoint, angiographic restenosis, defined as a follow-up percent diameter stenosis > 50, was examined in angiographic follow-up lesions after PCB angioplasty (n = 56) and DES placement (n = 53). This retrospective investigation was conducted in July 2022.The mean PCB size and length were 3.23 ± 0.42 and 18.4 ± 4.3 mm, respectively. The TLF frequency in the PCB group (6.8% during the mean observational interval of 1536 ± 538 days) was not significantly different from that in the DES group (14.6%, 1344 ± 606 days, P = 0.097). PCB was not a significant predictor of TLF in the univariate analysis (hazard ratio: 0.424; 95%CI: 0.15-1.21; P = 0.108). There was no angiographic restenosis after PCB angioplasty.The present observational single-center study showed that PCB for de novo stenosis in the LV had no significant adverse impact on TLF and had favorable angiographic outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Paclitaxel/farmacología , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Constricción Patológica , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Stents/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the evolution of stent technology, there is a non-negligible risk of in-stent restenosis (ISR) after Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Large-scale registry data on the prevalence and clinical management of ISR is lacking. METHODS: The aim was to describe the epidemiology and management of patients with ≥1 ISR lesions treated with PCI (ISR PCI). Data on characteristics, management and clinical outcomes were analyzed for patients undergoing ISR PCI in the France-PCI all-comers registry. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and December 2018, 31,892 lesions were treated in 22,592 patients, 7.3 % of whom underwent ISR PCI. Patients undergoing ISR PCI were older (68.5 vs 67.8; p < 0.001), and more likely to have diabetes (32.7 % vs 25.4 %, p < 0.001), chronic coronary syndrome or multivessel disease. ISR PCI concerned drug eluting stents (DES) ISR in 48.8 % of cases. Patients with ISR lesions were more frequently treated with DES than drug eluting balloon or balloon angioplasty (74.2 %, 11.6 % and 12.9 %, respectively). Intravascular imaging was rarely used. At 1 year, patients with ISR had higher target lesion revascularization rates (4.3 % vs. 1.6 %; HR 2.24 [1.64-3.06]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a large all-comers registry, ISR PCI was not infrequent and associated with worse prognosis than non-ISR PCI. Further studies and technical improvements are warranted to improve the outcomes of ISR PCI.
Asunto(s)
Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Prevalencia , Angiografía Coronaria , Stents/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Constricción Patológica , Sistema de Registros , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) with a newly designed double-layer micromesh stent using wrist approach in patients with significant carotid disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2016 and December 2021, 105 patients undergoing CAS with Roadsaver™ stent were enrolled in a single center prospective study. Follow-up assessments included neurological exams, duplex ultrasound (DUS), and 12-lead ECG. The primary endpoint was the 30-day composite rate of stroke, death, and myocardial infarction. Secondary endpoints included procedure success, access site complications, device success, target lesion revascularization, and in-stent restenosis evaluated with DUS. Long-term outcomes up to 72 months of follow-up were assessed in all eligible patients. RESULTS: The study population was predominantly male (69.5%) with a median age of 68 ± 8 years. Patients were symptomatic in 80% of the cases, and 35% fulfilled the high-risk criteria for surgical endarterectomy. The right internal carotid artery was the target artery in 56 (53.4%), and the left in 49 (46.6%) of the cases. All procedures were successfully completed from the right wrist, with right radial access in 94 (89.5%) cases and ulnar artery access with previous radial artery occlusion in 11 (10.5%) cases. All patients were treated successfully with the study device. The primary endpoint was met with a 30-day major adverse event rate of 0.9% (1/105). Up to 72 months of follow-up (median 30 ± 20 months) there were no strokes, neurological deaths, or target lesion revascularization of the treated lesion. Doppler ultrasound examination revealed nonsignificant in-stent restenosis in two asymptomatic patients. There was no hand ischemia detected in any patient. CONCLUSION: Results from this study demonstrate the radial and ulnar access for CAS with double layer micromesh Roadsaver™ stent is safe and feasible and associated with favorable early and long-term follow-up.
Asunto(s)
Estenosis Carotídea , Endarterectomía Carotidea , Stents , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Arteria Carótida Interna/cirugía , Estenosis Carotídea/cirugía , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Endarterectomía Carotidea/efectos adversos , Endarterectomía Carotidea/instrumentación , Endarterectomía Carotidea/métodos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Estudios Prospectivos , Stents/efectos adversos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Diseño de EquipoRESUMEN
To explore the risk factors for in-stent restenosis (ISR) after stent implantation in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) using logistic regression analysis. From February 2020 to February 2022, 350 patients with CHD after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were divided into a stent stenosis group and a stent nonstenosis group based on coronary angiography results performed 2 years after PCI. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to analyze the factors related to ISR after coronary stent implantation in patients with CHD. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Patient signed informed consent. Of the 350 patients with CHD, 138 (39.43%) had stent restenosis while 212 did not. Univariate analysis showed that a family history of CHD, history of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and drinking, discontinuation of aspirin, use of conventional dose statins, calcified lesions,â ≥â 3 implanted stents, stent lengthâ ≥â 30 mm, stent diameterâ <â 3 mm, and tandem stent increased the risk of restenosis. The incidence of restenosis was higher in the stent group than that in the nonstent group (Pâ <â .05). There were no significant differences in the blood lipid level, left ventricular ejection fraction, clopidogrel/ticagrelor or beta-blocker withdrawal, location of culprit vessels, and thrombotic lesions between the 2 groups (Pâ >â .05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that family history of CHD, history of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and drinking, aspirin withdrawal, use of conventional doses of statins, calcified lesions,â ≥â 3 implanted stents, stent lengthâ ≥â 30 mm, stent diameterâ <â 3 mm, and tandem stenting were risk factors for ISR within 2 years after PCI. A family history of CHD, history of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and drinking, discontinuation of aspirin, use of conventional dose statins, calcified lesions,â ≥â 3 stent implantations, stent lengthâ ≥â 30 mm, stent diameterâ <â 3 mm, and tandem stenting are risk factors for ISR within 2 years after PCI in patients with CHD.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas , Hipertensión , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Constricción Patológica , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Volumen Sistólico , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Stents/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Aspirina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a novel and effective device for coronary artery disease patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the incidence and possible influencing factors associated with binary restenosis have not yet been adequately assessed. METHODS: The data are extracted from a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. A total of 211 patients with ISR were enrolled at 13 centers from August 2017 to October 2018 and treated with DCB. At the 9-month coronary angiographic follow-up, patients were divided into restenosis and non-restenosis groups, and demographic data, lesion features, and laboratory tests were retrospectively reviewed. Furthermore, logistic regression analysis was used to identify possible influencing factors. RESULTS: All patients successfully underwent treatment, and 166 patients with 190 lesions took part in angiography follow-ups at 9 months. Of these, 41 patients with 44 target lesions developed restenosis following treatment, and the incidence of ISR was 24.7%. There were significant differences in the average length of target lesions and the number of multivessel lesions and fasting plasma glucose (FBG) between the two groups (p < 0.05). Demographic data, cardiac risk factors, left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF), blood routine tests, biochemical tests, and other features of devices and lesions showed no difference. Logistic regression analyses showed that FBG > 6.1 mmol/L (OR: 7.185 95% CI: 2.939-17.567 P < 0.001) and length of lesion (OR:1.046 95% CI: 1.001-1.093 P = 0.046) were associated risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The longer length of lesions, more target lesions and FBG > 6.1 mmol/L per individual may be characteristics of patients showing ISR following treatment. Studies with larger sample size, and more complete follow-up data are needed in the future to expend on these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: No.: NCT04213378, first posted date (30/12/2019).
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia de Balón , Reestenosis Coronaria , Humanos , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Incidencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios Prospectivos , Angioplastia de Balón/efectos adversos , Constricción Patológica/complicacionesRESUMEN
Objective: To investigate the efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) combined with cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) in the treatment of drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (DES-ISR) and to construct a predictive model for the occurrence of DES-ISR. Methods: According to the criteria of diagnosis, inclusion, and exclusion, DES-ISR patients who were treated in the outpatient and inpatient departments of cardiovascular medicine of Second People's Hospital of Guangdong Province from July 2021 to December 2021 were included. A total of 72 cases were planned to be enrolled, including 36 cases in the control group and 36 cases in the experimental group. The control group was treated with DCB, and the experimental group was combined with CBA. The treatment success rate, coronary angiography results before and after surgery, and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events during the follow-up period were compared between the two groups. Seventy-two DES-ISR patients were divided into ISR group and 59 non-ISR patients were divided into non-ISR group. The clinical data of the two groups were compared to analyze the risk factors affecting the occurrence of DES-ISR, and the prediction model was established. Results: The surgical success rate of the experimental group was 94.44% (34/36), which was higher than the 77.78% (28/36) of the control group (P < 0.05). The minimum lumen diameter (MLD) of the experimental group 6 months after operation was greater than that of the control group, the late lumen loss (LL) and lumen stenosis rate were higher than those in the control group, and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). In the ISR group, the proportion of patients with abnormal BMI, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, and family history of coronary heart disease and multivessel coronary artery disease was higher than that in the non-ISR group, the degree of stenosis target lesion was higher than that in the non-ISR group, the diameter of target lesion and stent diameter were smaller than those in the non-ISR group, and the length of target lesion and stent length were longer than those in the non-ISR group; the number of stents was more than that in the non-ISR group (P < 0.05). Combined hypertension, multiple coronary artery lesions, stenosis target lesion degree ≥85.05%, and target lesion length ≥36.88 mm were risk factors for DES-ISR, and target lesion diameter ≥3.15 mm and stent diameter ≥3.15 mm were protective factors (P < 0.05). The prediction model of DES-ISR was obtained by multiple logistic regression analysis, P = 1[1 + e (2.281 + 3.321Xhypertension + 3.427Xumber of arterial lesions + 3.359Xstenosis target lesion degree - 3.143Xtarget lesion diameter + 0.650Xtarget lesion length - 10.159Xstent diameter)]. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed that Hosmer-Lemeshow χ 2 = 0.925, P =0.413; the ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC of the prediction model for the occurrence of DES-ISR was 0.924, the SE value was 0.022, and the 95% CI was 0.880-0.967. Conclusion: DCB combined with CBA has good clinical efficacy in the treatment of DES-ISR, which can reduce the rate of lumen stenosis and the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events. The prediction model established according to risk factors has high predictive value for the occurrence of DES-ISR.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Hipertensión , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Constricción Patológica , Angiografía Coronaria , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/epidemiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Humanos , Hipertensión/complicaciones , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background A history of preeclampsia is associated with increased risk of coronary artery disease and experimental evidence suggests that a history of preeclampsia also increases the risk of restenosis. However, the extent to which a history of preeclampsia is associated with risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention in women is unknown. Methods and Results We included 6065 parous women aged ≤65 years with first percutaneous coronary intervention on 9452 segments 2006 to 2017, linking nationwide data on percutaneous coronary intervention and delivery history in Sweden. Main outcomes were clinical restenosis and target lesion revascularization within 2 years. We accounted for segment-, procedure-, and patient-related potential predictors of restenosis in proportional hazards regression models. Restenosis occurred in 345 segments (3.7%) and target lesion revascularization was performed on 383 patients (6.3%). A history of preeclampsia was neither significantly associated with risk of restenosis (predictor-accounted hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.41-1.23]) nor target lesion revascularization (0.74 [95% CI, 0.51-1.07]) compared with a normotensive pregnancy history. When term and preterm preeclampsia were investigated separately, segments in women with a history of term preeclampsia had a lower risk of restenosis (predictor-accounted HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21-0.94]). A history of preeclampsia was not significantly associated with death by any cause within 2 years of the index procedure (predictor-accounted HR 1.06, [95% CI, 0.62-1.80]). Conclusions A history of preeclampsia was not associated with increased risk of restenosis but instead some evidence pointed to a decreased risk. To facilitate future studies and allow for replication, concomitant collection of data on pregnancy complication history and percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes in women is warranted.