Percutaneous treatment of focal vs. diffuse in-stent restenosis: A prospective randomized comparison of conventional therapies
Corresponding Author
Michael Ragosta MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Interventional Cardiology, Box 800158, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville, VA 22908Search for more papers by this authorHabib Samady MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorLawrence W. Gimple MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorIan J. Sarembock MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorEric R. Powers MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Michael Ragosta MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Interventional Cardiology, Box 800158, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville, VA 22908Search for more papers by this authorHabib Samady MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorLawrence W. Gimple MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorIan J. Sarembock MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorEric R. Powers MD
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Few randomized studies compare outcomes for focal vs. diffuse in-stent restenosis (ISR) using conventional treatments. The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) for focal vs. diffuse ISR using conventional techniques. One hundred thirteen patients with ISR were prospectively classified as focal (< 10 mm) or diffuse (> 10 mm). Focal ISR was randomized to balloon angioplasty (n = 29) or restenting (n = 29) and diffuse ISR randomized to rotational atherectomy (n = 30) or restenting (n = 25). At 9 months, patients with focal ISR had higher survival free of MACEs than patients with diffuse ISR (86% vs. 63%; P < 0.005), with no difference between techniques. Only the presence of diffuse ISR was an independent predictor of MACE at 9 months. Thus, focal ISR has a low rate of MACE compared to diffuse ISR, which carries a high event rate regardless of treatment employed. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:344–349. © 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
REFERENCES
- 1 Hoffmann R, Mintz GS, Dussaillant GR, et al. Patterns and mechanisms of in-stent restenosis: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 1996; 94: 1247–1254.
- 2 Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease: Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 496–501.
- 3 Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease: Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Medicine 1994; 331: 489–495.
- 4 Lee SG, Lee CW, Cheong SS, et al. Immediate and long-term outcomes of rotational atherectomy versus balloon angioplasty alone for treatment of diffuse in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 1998; 82: 140–143.
- 5 Mehran R, Mintz GS, Satler LF, et al. Treatment of in-stent restenosis with excimer laser coronary angioplasty: mechanisms and results compared with PTCA alone. Circulation 1997; 96: 2183–2189.
- 6 Eltchaninoff H, Koning R, Tron C, et al. Balloon angioplasty for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: immediate results and 6 month angiographic recurrent restenosis rate. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 32: 980–984.
- 7 Bossi I, Klersy C, Black AJ, et al. In-stent restenosis: long-term outcome and predictors of subsequent target lesion revascularization after repeat balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 35: 1569–1576.
- 8 Mehran R, Dangas G, Mintz GS, et al. Treatment of in-stent restenosis with excimer laser coronary angioplasty versus rotational atherectomy: comparative mechanisms and results. Circulation 2000; 101: 2484–2489.
- 9 Hamburger JN, Foley DP, de Feyter PJ, et al. Six-month outcome after excimer laser coronary angioplasty for diffuse in-stent restenosis in native coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 2000; 86: 390–394.
- 10 Goldberg SL, Berger P, Cohen DJ, et al. Rotational atherectomy or balloon angioplasty in the treatment of intra-stent restenosis: BARASTER multicenter registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000; 51: 407–413.
- 11 Mehran R, Dangas G, Abizaid A, et al. Treatment of focal in-stent restenosis with balloon angioplasty alone versus stenting: short- and long-term results. Am Heart J 2001; 141: 610–614.
- 12 Moustapha A, Assali AR, Sdringola S, et al. Percutaneous and surgical interventions for in-stent restenosis: long-term outcomes and effect of diabetes mellitus. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37: 1877–1882.
- 13 vom Dahl J, Dietz U, Haager PK, et al. Rotational atherectomy does not reduce recurrent in-stent restenosis: results of the angioplasty versus rotational atherectomy for treatment of diffuse in-stent restenosis trial (ARTIST). Circulation 2002; 105: 583–588.
- 14 Sharma SK, Duvvuri S, Dangas G, et al. Rotational atherectomy for in-stent restenosis: acute and long term results of first 100 cases. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 32: 1358–1365.
- 15 Teirstein PS, Massullo V, Jani S, et al. Catheter-based radiotherapy to inhibit restenosis after coronary stenting. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 1697–703.
- 16 Popma J, Suntharalingam M, Lansky AJ, et al. Randomized trial of 90Sr/90Y [beta]-radiation versus placebo control for treatment of in-stent restenosis. Circulation 2002; 106: 1090–1096.
- 17 Leon MB, Teirstein PS, Moses JW, et al. Localized intracoronary gamma-radiation therapy to inhibit the recurrence of restenosis after stenting. N Eng J Med 2001; 344: 250–256.
- 18 Waksman R, White RL, Chan RC, et al. Intracoronary gamma-radiation therapy after angioplasty inhibits recurrence in patients with in-stent restenosis. Circulation 2000; 101: 2165–2171.
- 19 Waksman R, Raizner AE, Yeung AC, et al., for the INHIBIT investigators. Use of localized intracoronary β-radiation in treatment of in-stent restenosis. Lancet 2002; 359: 551–557.
- 20 Waksman R. Late thrombosis after radiation: sitting on a time bomb. Circulation 1999; 100: 780–782.
- 21 Albiero R, Nishida T, Adamian M, et al. Edge restenosis after implantation of high activity (32)P radioactive beta-emitting stents. Circulation 2000; 101: 2454–2457.
- 22 Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al., the RAVEL study group. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1773–1780.
- 23 Mehran R, Dangas G, Abizaid AS, et al. Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis: classification and implications for long-term outcome. Circulation 1999; 100: 1872–1878.
- 24
Kini A,
Marmur JD,
Dangas G, et al.
Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis and implications on subsequent revascularization.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
2000;
49:
23–29.
10.1002/(SICI)1522-726X(200001)49:1<23::AID-CCD4>3.0.CO;2-3 CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 25 Bauters C, Banos JL, Van Belle E, et al. Six-month angiographic outcome after successful repeat percutaneous intervention for in-stent restenosis. Circulation 1998; 97: 318–321.
- 26 Goldberg SL, Loussararian A, De Gregorio J, et al. Predictors of diffuse and aggressive intra-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37: 1019–1025.
