Publication | Open Access
Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis Across 3-Stent Generations
73
Citations
23
References
2014
Year
Percutaneous Coronary InterventionEndovascular TechniqueCardiovascular DiseaseCoronary Artery DiseaseClinical PresentationVascular ImagingCardiologySecond-generation Drug-eluting StentsArterial DiseaseMedicineAtherosclerosisBare Metal StentEmergency MedicineRadiology
Background— Clinical presentation of bare metal stent in-stent restenosis (ISR) in patients undergoing target lesion revascularization is well characterized and negatively affects on outcomes, whereas the presentation and outcomes of first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) remains under-reported. Methods and Results— The study included 909 patients (1077 ISR lesions) distributed as follows: bare metal stent (n=388), first-generation DES (n=425), and second-generation DES (n=96), categorized into acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or non-ACS presentation mode at the time of first target lesion revascularization. ACS was further classified as myocardial infarction (MI) and unstable angina. For bare metal stent, first-generation DES and second-generation DES, ACS was the clinical presentation in 67.8%, 71.0%, and 66.7% of patients, respectively ( P =0.470), whereas MI occurred in 10.6%, 10.1%, and 5.2% of patients, respectively ( P =0.273). The correlates for MI as ISR presentation were current smokers (odds ratio, 3.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.78–5.13; P <0.001), and chronic renal failure (odds ratio, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.60–4.70; P <0.001), with a protective trend for the second-generation DES ISR (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.12–1.03; P =0.060). ACS presentations had an independent effect on major adverse cardiac events (death, MI, and re-target lesion revascularization) at 6 months (MI versus non-ACS: adjusted hazard ratio, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.84–8.94; P <0.001; unstable angina versus non-ACS: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.01–3.87; P =0.046). Conclusions— ISR clinical presentation is similar irrespective of stent type. MI as ISR presentation seems to be associated with patient and not device-related factors. ACS as ISR presentation has an independent effect on major adverse cardiac events, suggesting that ISR remains a hazard and should be minimized.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1