DOCSLIB.ORG

Restenosis After Carotid Interventions and Its Relationship with Recurrent Ipsilateral Stroke: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restenosis After Carotid Interventions and Its Relationship with Recurrent Ipsilateral Stroke: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg (2017) 53, 766e775 REVIEW Restenosis after Carotid Interventions and Its Relationship with Recurrent Ipsilateral Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis R. Kumar a, A. Batchelder a, A. Saratzis a, A.F. AbuRahma b, P. Ringleb c, B.K. Lal d, J.L. Mas e, M. Steinbauer f, A.R. Naylor a,* a Department of Vascular Surgery at Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, UK b Division of Vascular Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, VA, USA c Neurologische Klinik der Ruprecht-Karls-Universität, Heidelberg, Germany d Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA e Hospital Sainte-Anne, Université Paris-Descartes, Paris, France f Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Regensburg, Germany WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS This meta-analysis of prospective surveillance data derived from nine randomised controlled trials found that CAS patients with an untreated asymptomatic > 70% restenosis had an extremely low rate of late ipsilateral stroke (0.8% over 50 months). CEA patients with an untreated, asymptomatic > 70% restenosis had a signifi- cantly higher risk of late ipsilateral stroke (compared with patients with no restenosis), but the risk was only 5% at 37 months. Overall, 97% of all late ipsilateral strokes after CAS and 85% after CEA occurred in patients with no evidence of a significant restenosis or occlusion. Objective: Do asymptomatic restenoses > 70% after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) increase the risk of late ipsilateral stroke? Methods: Systematic review identified 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting rates of restenosis > 70% (and/or occlusion) in patients who had undergone CEA/CAS for the treatment of primary atherosclerotic disease, and nine RCTs reported late ipsilateral stroke rates. Proportional meta-analyses and odds ratios (OR) at end of follow-up were performed. Results: The weighted incidence of restenosis > 70% was 5.8% after “any” CEA, median 47 months (11 RCTs; 4249 patients); 4.1% after patched CEA, median 32 months (5 RCTs; 1078 patients), and 10% after CAS, median 62 months (5 RCTs; 2716 patients). In four RCTs (1964 patients), one of 125 (0.8%) with restenosis > 70% (or occlusion) after CAS suffered late ipsilateral stroke over a median 50 months, compared with 37 of 1839 (2.0%) in CAS patients with no significant restenosis (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.24e3.21; p ¼ .8339). In seven RCTs (2810 patients), 13 out of 141 (9.2%) with restenosis > 70% (or occlusion) after CEA suffered late ipsilateral stroke over a median 37 months, compared with 33 out of 2669 (1.2%) in patients with no significant restenoses (OR 9.02; 95% CI 4.70e17.28; p < .0001). Following data correction to exclude patients whose surveillance scan showed no evidence of restenosis > 70% before stroke onset, the prevalence of stroke ipsilateral to an untreated asymptomatic > 70% restenosis was seven out of 135 (5.2%) versus 40 out of 2704 (1.5%) in CEA patients with no significant restenosis (OR 4.77; 95% CI 2.29e9.92). Conclusions: CAS patients with untreated asymptomatic > 70% restenosis had an extremely low rate of late ipsilateral stroke (0.8% over 50 months). CEA patients with untreated, asymptomatic > 70% restenosis had a significantly higher risk of late ipsilateral stroke (compared with patients with no restenosis), but this was only 5% at 37 months. Overall, 97% of all late ipsilateral strokes after CAS and 85% after CEA occurred in patients without evidence of significant restenosis or occlusion. Ó 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Article history: Received 26 October 2016, Accepted 13 February 2017, Available online 28 March 2017 Keywords: Carotid endarterectomy, Carotid stenting, Restenosis, Recurrent stroke * Corresponding author. Vascular Research Group, Division of Cardio- vascular Sciences, Clinical Sciences Building, Leicester Royal Infirmary, INTRODUCTION Leicester LE27LX, UK. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.R. Naylor). In a 1997 systematic review, up to 8% of patients under- 1078-5884/Ó 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by going carotid endarterectomy (CEA) developed a significant Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. restenosis of the operated internal carotid artery (ICA) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.02.016 þÿDescargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Consejería de Sanidad de Madrid Biblioteca Virtual de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en junio 12, 2017. Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2017. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados. Restenosis after Carotid Interventions 767 during follow-up.1 However, very few (if any) contemporary Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, the Journal of Vascular practice guidelines provide specific advice on how these Surgery, and the Annals of Vascular Surgery. patients should be managed, especially as most are Demographic data retrieved from constituent RCTs asymptomatic at the point of detection after CEA or carotid included intervention (CEA, CAS), carotid endovascular artery stenting (CAS). The 2011 ‘14-Society’ Guidelines on intervention (CAS, balloon angioplasty, mixed cohort); CEA the management of extracranial carotid artery disease method (traditional, eversion, mixed cohort), CEA arterio- commented that “restenosis is generally benign and does tomy closure (primary, patched, mixed cohort), presence/ not require revascularisation, except when it leads to absence of restenosis > 70% or occlusion, and the mean recurrent ischaemic symptoms or progresses to pre- follow-up period. Studies considered for inclusion in the occlusive severity. Under these circumstances, it may be first meta-analysis (to determine the prevalence of reste- justifiable to repeat revascularisation, either by CEA in the nosis > 70% or occlusion after CEA and CAS) had to report hands of an experienced surgeon or by CAS”.2 However, this rates of restenosis > 70% (or occlusion) in the operated ICA “comment” was never promoted to become a formal during serial surveillance after CEA and/or CAS, but not recommendation and surgeons/interventionists have been whether these studies published rates of recurrent ipsilat- left to manage patients on a case by case basis. No-one eral stroke. would dispute that most patients with a symptomatic The second meta-analysis was undertaken to determine restenosis > 50% warrant re-intervention (unless contra- whether a restenosis > 70% (or occlusion) after CEA and indicated), but what about patients with asymptomatic 70e CAS was associated with higher rates of recurrent ipsilateral 99% restenoses? Despite the informal advice provided by stroke. This required the constituent RCTs to report rates of the 14-Society Guidelines, meta-analyses of contemporary restenosis > 70% and rates of recurrent late ipsilateral practice suggest that two thirds of patients undergoing re- stroke. The threshold of 70% was chosen because few sur- interventions for restenoses after CEA are asymptomatic,3 geons or interventionists would adopt a threshold of > 50% suggesting that many surgeons and interventionists or > 60% for re-intervening in asymptomatic patients, and remain uncomfortable about not re-intervening. very few RCTs published outcome data using a stenosis Data from individual multicentre randomised controlled threshold of 80%. Data abstraction was performed inde- trials (RCTs) have provided conflicting evidence of whether pendently and the results compared between investigators. restenoses after CEA/CAS are associated with an increased If there was any disagreement between the two in- risk of recurrent ipsilateral stroke. Some have reported no vestigators (R.K., A.B.), this was resolved by consensus dis- statistically significant association between restenosis and cussion or referral to a third party (A.R.N.). recurrent ipsilateral stroke4e6; the Carotid Revascularization The principal investigators (PIs) of each RCT that were Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST) reported that identified for inclusion in the second meta-analysis were restenoses > 70% after CEA were associated with a signif- contacted for additional information; for example, to clarify icantly higher prevalence of recurrent stroke after CEA, but ipsilateral stroke rates where these had been combined not after CAS.7 with late ipsilateral transient ischaemic attack (TIA). All PIs The aim of the current study was to perform a systematic were asked to review their surveillance data in patients with review and meta-analysis of data derived from RCTs where a “restenosis > 70% or occlusion” who suffered a late CEA and/or CAS had been performed for the treatment of ipsilateral stroke. This was to determine the severity of the primary atherosclerotic disease, which published surveil- restenosis in the treated ICA in the duplex ultrasound (DUS) lance data on rates of restenosis > 70% and/or occlusion, surveillance study that immediately preceded stroke onset. with specific reference to whether untreated asymptomatic In that way, it was possible to determine whether a diag- restenoses > 70% were associated with a higher risk of late nosis of “restenosis > 70%” (or occlusion) was made before ipsilateral stroke than patients with no significant reste- or after stroke onset. Additional data regarding restenosis noses. RCTs were chosen (rather than observational studies) severity prior to stroke onset were provided from the PIs of because they are prospective, they tend to be conducted eight RCTs, including four with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Coronary Collaterals and Risk for Restenosis After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions
    Meier et al. BMC Medicine 2012, 10:62 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/62 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Coronary collaterals and risk for restenosis after percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta- analysis Pascal Meier1*†, Andreas Indermuehle2†, Bertram Pitt3, Tobias Traupe4, Stefano F de Marchi5, Tom Crake1, Guido Knapp6, Alexandra J Lansky7 and Christian Seiler4 Abstract Background: The benefit of the coronary collateral circulation (natural bypass network) on survival is well established. However, data derived from smaller studies indicates that coronary collaterals may increase the risk for restenosis after percutaneous coronary interventions. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies was to explore the impact of the collateral circulation on the risk for restenosis. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI Web of Science databases (2001 to 15 July 2011). Random effects models were used to calculate summary risk ratios (RR) for restenosis. The primary endpoint was angiographic restenosis > 50%. Results: A total of 7 studies enrolling 1,425 subjects were integrated in this analysis. On average across studies, the presence of a good collateralization was predictive for restenosis (risk ratio (RR) 1.40 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.80); P = 0.009). This risk ratio was consistent in the subgroup analyses where collateralization was assessed with intracoronary pressure measurements (RR 1.37 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.83); P = 0.038) versus visual assessment (RR 1.41 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.99); P = 0.049). For the subgroup of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), the RR for restenosis with ‘good collaterals’ was 1.64 (95% CI 1.14 to 2.35) compared to ‘poor collaterals’ (P = 0.008).
    [Show full text]
  • Blood Biomarkers of Progressive Atherosclerosis and Restenosis After
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Blood biomarkers of progressive atherosclerosis and restenosis after stenting of symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis Melanie Haidegger1, Markus Kneihsl1*, Kurt Niederkorn1, Hannes Deutschmann2, Harald Mangge3, Christian Vetta1, Michael Augustin2, Gerit Wünsch4, Simon Fandler‑Höfer1, Susanna Horner1, Christian Enzinger1,2 & Thomas Gattringer1,2 In‑stent restenosis (ISR) represents a major complication after stenting of intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS). Biomarkers derived from routine blood sampling including C‑reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil‑to‑lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet‑to‑lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and mean platelet volume (MPV) have been associated with progressive atherosclerosis. We investigated the role of CRP, NLR, PLR and MPV on the development of intracranial ISR and recurrent stroke risk. We retrospectively included all patients who had undergone stenting of symptomatic ICAS at our university hospital between 2005 and 2016. ISR (≥ 50% stenosis) was diagnosed by regular Duplex sonography follow‑up studies and confrmed by digital subtraction angiography or computed tomography angiography (mean follow‑up duration: 5 years). Laboratory parameters were documented before stenting, at the time of restenosis and at last clinical follow‑up. Of 115 patients (mean age: 73 ± 13 years; female: 34%), 38 (33%) developed ISR. The assessed laboratory parameters did not difer between patients with ISR and those without (p > 0.1). While ISR was associated with the occurrence of recurrent ischemic stroke (p = 0.003), CRP, NLR, PLR and MPV were not predictive of such events (p > 0.1). Investigated blood biomarkers of progressive atherosclerosis were not predictive for the occurrence of ISR or recurrent ischemic stroke after ICAS stenting during a 5‑year follow‑up.
    [Show full text]
  • Interventional Cardiology MOC Exam Blueprint
    ® INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY Maintenance of Certification (MOC) Examination Blueprint ABIM invites diplomates to help develop Purpose of the Interventional Cardiology the Interventional Cardiology MOC exam MOC exam blueprint The MOC exam is designed to evaluate whether a certified Based on feedback from physicians that MOC assessments interventional cardiologist has maintained competence and should better reflect what they see in practice, in 2016 the currency in the knowledge and judgment required for practice. American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) invited all certified The exam emphasizes diagnosis and management of prevalent interventional cardiologists to provide ratings of the relative conditions, particularly in areas where practice has changed frequency and importance of blueprint topics in practice. in recent years. As a result of the blueprint review by ABIM This review process, which resulted in a new MOC exam diplomates, the MOC exams will places less emphasis on rare blueprint, will be used on an ongoing basis to inform and conditions and focuses more on situations in which physician update all MOC assessments created by ABIM. No matter intervention can have important consequences for patients. what form ABIM’s assessments ultimately take, they will For conditions that are usually managed by other specialists, need to be informed by front-line clinicians sharing their the focus will be on recognition rather than on management. perspective on what is important to know. Exam format A sample of over 275 interventional cardiologists, similar to the total invited population of interventional cardiologists in The traditional 10-year MOC exam is composed of 220 single- age, gender, time spent in direct patient care, and geographic best-answer multiple- choice questions, of which approximately region of practice, provided the blueprint topic ratings.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning Objectives Clinical Spectrum of Acute Cardiac Syndromes
    Getting to the Heart of Accurately Defining Cardiac Ischemic Syndromes Garry L. Huff, MD, CCS, CCDS President & CEO, Enjoin Christopher M. Huff, MD, FACC Interventional Cardiologist1 Learning Objectives • At the completion of this educational activity, the learner will be able to: – Define the various acute cardiac ischemic syndromes – Sequence priorities of principal diagnosis in persons admitted for acute cardiac syndromes – Recognize the potential of documentation gaps between CDI and the providers regarding the meaning of clinical terms and the ICD‐10‐CM disease classification system – Apply lessons learned to common clinical scenarios 2 Clinical Spectrum of Acute Cardiac Syndromes 3 2017 Copyright, HCPro, an H3.Group division of Simplify Compliance LLC. All rights reserved. 1 These materials may not be copied without written permission. Etiology of Acute Cardiac Ischemia Demand Blood ischemia supply Acute Oxygen coronary demand syndrome 4 Spectrum of Acute Coronary Syndrome STEMI NSTEMI Type 1 MI Injury EKG changes without elevated troponin Unstable angina 5 Spectrum of Supply/Demand Mismatch NSTEMI Demand ischemia/angina 6 2017 Copyright, HCPro, an H3.Group division of Simplify Compliance LLC. All rights reserved. 2 These materials may not be copied without written permission. Definition of Myocardial Infarction Circulation. 2012; 126:2020‐2035 7 Clinical Definition of Acute MI “Cardiac biomarkers (troponin)”** AND Symptoms OR New EKG findings OR Imaging studies ** Biomarkers not required in defining AMI in setting of sudden cardiac
    [Show full text]
  • Device Therapytreating Restenosis After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation
    RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS Nature Reviews Cardiology 10, 62 (2013); published online 18 December 2012; doi:10.1038/nrcardio.2012.189 DEVICE THERAPY Treating restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation Drug-eluting stents (DES), including stents is intuitively attractive,” says Robert Byrne, In their study report, the researchers eluting sirolimus or one of its analogues lead author on the study report. highlight that trials involving longer (limus-eluting stents), are a common The investigators enrolled 402 patients follow-up in larger groups of patients are choice of treatment for patients with with restenosis after implantation of a needed to confirm the safety of using PEB coronary artery disease. Although these limus-eluting stent and randomly assigned in this setting and to determine whether any stents are superior to bare-metal stents, them to receive a PES (n = 131), PEB differences in the effects of PEB and PES are some patients with DES will eventually (n = 137), or balloon angioplasty with no clinically meaningful. They also point out have restenosis. Repeat stenting is an option drug elution (n = 134). Paclitaxel was used that their findings might not be applicable for these patients, but some clinicians are in both drug-eluting devices to restrict to other drug-eluting balloon catheters. concerned about the potential effects of differences to the device itself. PES and The researchers have already begun the several stent layers in the vessel wall. The PEB were superior to angioplasty with a ISAR-DESIRE 4 study, which will examine ISAR-DESIRE 3 study investigators have noneluting balloon, as measured by the whether the efficacy of PEB treatment now shown that paclitaxel-eluting balloons diameter of stenosis 6–8 months after could be improved by first preparing the (PEB) are not inferior to paclitaxel-eluting treatment (37.4%, 38.0%, and 54.1% lesion with cutting or scoring balloon stents (PES) for the treatment respectively).
    [Show full text]
  • Catheter Based Intracoronary Brachytherapy Leads to Increased
    160 CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE Heart: first published as 10.1136/hrt.2003.013482 on 16 January 2004. Downloaded from Catheter based intracoronary brachytherapy leads to increased platelet activation M Jaster, V Fuster, P Rosenthal, M Pauschinger, Q-V Tran, D Janssen, W Hinkelbein, P Schwimmbeck, H-P Schultheiss, U Rauch ............................................................................................................................... Heart 2004;90:160–164. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2003.013482 Background: Vascular brachytherapy (VBT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with a higher risk of stent thrombosis than conventional treatment. Objective: To investigate in vivo periprocedural platelet activation with and without VBT, and to assess a possible direct effect of radiation on platelet activation. Design: Of 50 patients with stable angina, 23 received VBT after PCI, while 27 had PCI only. The 23 See end of article for authors’ affiliations patients who received VBT after PCI were pretreated for one month with aspirin and clopidogrel. Platelet ....................... activation was assessed by flow cytometry. Results: The two patient groups did not differ in their platelet activation before the intervention. There was Correspondence to: Dr Ursula Rauch, a significant increase in activation immediately after VBT, with 21.2% (interquartile range 13.0% to 37.6%) Department of Cardiology, thrombospondin positive and 54.0% (42.3% to 63.6%) CD 63 positive platelets compared with 12.7% University Hospital (9.8% to 14.9%) thrombospondin positive and 37.9% (33.2% to 45.2%) CD 63 positive platelets before the Benjamin Franklin, Free intervention (p , 0.001 and p , 0.01, respectively). Patients without VBT had no periprocedural University of Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, difference in platelet activation immediately after PCI.
    [Show full text]
  • Predictive Factors for Restenosis After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation
    REVIEW ISSN 1738-5520 Korean Circulation J 2007;37:97-102 ⓒ 2007, The Korean Society of Circulation Predictive Factors for Restenosis after Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation Cheol Whan Lee, MD and Seung-Jung Park, MD Department of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan, Seoul, Korea ABSTRACT Background and Objectives：Despite the dramatic reduction in restenosis conferred by drug-eluting stents (DES), restenosis remains a significant problem for real-world patients. Restenosis is a complex phenomenon, and a variety of stent-, drug-, patient- and lesion-related factors have been studied as the determinants of restenosis after DES implantation. Methods and Results：The stent delivery system, the polymer and the drug are integral components of DES, and these are the device-specific factors that can affect restenosis. While the sirolimus- eluting Cypher stent appears to provide better outcomes than the paclitaxel-eluting Taxus stent in high-risk patient groups with complex lesions, such differences between the two DES are not apparent in the low-risk groups. Diabetic patients are generally prone to restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention, but there are conflicting findings regarding the impact of diabetes mellitus on restenosis after DES implantation. The post- intervention final lumen area continues to be the most important determinant of restenosis after DES implanta- tion, indicating that a greater stented area contributes to a decreased rate of restenosis even in the DES era. Non- uniform strut distribution and stent fracture also contribute to the development of restenosis after DES im- plantation. In addition, the risk of restenosis increases linearly according to lesion length, and a “full metal jacket” approach in small vessels is related to a high risk of DES failure.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk Factors Associated with Intra‑Stent Restenosis After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    EXPERIMENTAL AND THERAPEUTIC MEDICINE 22: 1141, 2021 Risk factors associated with intra‑stent restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention DAN‑MIHAI ALEXANDRESCU1,2*, OVIDIU MITU1, IRINA IULIANA COSTACHE1, LIVIU MACOVEI1*, IVONA MITU3*, ANCA ALEXANDRESCU2 and CATALINA ARSENESCU GEORGESCU1 11st Medical Department, ‘Grigore T. Popa’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 700115 Iasi; 2Department of Cardiology‑Internal Medicine, Emergency County Hospital, 610136 Piatra Neamt; 3Department of Morpho‑Functional Sciences II, ‘Grigore T. Popa’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 700115 Iasi, Romania Received May 24, 2021; Accepted June 23, 2021 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2021.10575 Abstract. The present study aimed to explore the correlations without ISR vs. 25.22 mm in patients with ISR; P=0.311). between clinical, biological, imagistic and procedural factors There was an estimated two times higher risk (RR=2.13; with the risk of intra‑stent restenosis (ISR) in coronary artery 95% CI: 1.17‑3.88) concerning multi‑stenting and restenosis disease (CAD) patients after percutaneous coronary inter‑ degree >70%. To conclude, smoking, hypertension, diabetes vention (PCI). An observational cross‑sectional study was mellitus, high CRP levels, CKD, TIMI score, stent type, low conducted in a high‑volume PCI center over a period of 2 years. pressure for stent implantation and multi‑stenting were found A total of 235 consecutive patients diagnosed with angina or to be associated with ISR in patients following PCI. Therefore, acute coronary syndrome treated by PCI were included in a close follow‑up should be targeted in such patients. the study. Diagnosis of ISR was documented by coronary angiography in patients with suggestive coronary symptoms Introduction and ischemic changes in non‑invasive or invasive paraclinical investigations.
    [Show full text]
  • Stent Thrombosis and Restenosis: What Have We Learned and Where Are We Going? the Andreas Gru¨Ntzig Lecture ESC 2014
    European Heart Journal (2015) 36, 3320–3331 REVIEW doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv511 Clinical update Stent thrombosis and restenosis: what have we learned and where are we going? The Andreas Gru¨ntzig Lecture ESC 2014 Robert A. Byrne1, Michael Joner1, and Adnan Kastrati1,2* 1Deutsches Herzzentrum Mu¨nchen, Technische Universita¨t Mu¨nchen, Lazarettstr. 36, Munich, Germany; and 2DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany Downloaded from Received 3 May 2015; revised 17 August 2015; accepted 7 September 2015; online publish-ahead-of-print 28 September 2015 Modern-day stenting procedures leverage advances in pharmacotherapy and device innovation. Patients treated with contemporary antiplatelet http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/ agents, peri-procedural antithrombin therapy and new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have excellent outcomes over the short to me- dium term. Indeed, coupled with the reducing costs of these devices in most countries there remain very few indications where patients should be denied treatment with standard-of-care DES therapy. The two major causes of stent failure are stent thrombosis (ST) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). The incidence of both has reduced considerably in recent years. Current clinical registries and randomized trials with broad inclusion criteria show rates of ST at or ,1% after 1 year and 0.2–0.4% per year thereafter; rates of clinical ISR are 5% respectively. Angiographic surveillance studies in large cohorts show rates of angiographic ISR of 10% with new-generation DES. The advent of high-resolution intra- coronary imaging has shown that in many cases of late stent failure neoatherosclerotic change within the stented segment represents a final common pathway for both thrombotic and restenotic events.
    [Show full text]
  • Coronary Restenosis
    Review Article Acta Cardiol Sin 2005;21:177-89 Coronary Restenosis Chao-Chien Chang and Eng-Thiam Ong Percutaneous coronary interventions represent an attractive alternative to surgical revascularization; nevertheless, these techniques continue to be characterized by their propensity to elicit restenosis. Until now, the only widely accepted way to reduce restenosis rate has been the stent. However, clinical restenosis still represents the major limitation of this technology. Despite this limitation, angioplasty has become the most common revascularization procedure for coronary artery disease. Although the advent of coronary stents has reduced the incidence of restenosis, the problem still occurs in 20% to 30% of stented vessels.1 Restenosis is the principal drawback of percutaneous coronary interventions. Furthermore, the numerous drugs and mechanical interventions that have been used to address restenosis have had minimal success. Restenosis severely limits the benefits of angioplasty in many patients, particularly those with diabetes or multivessel coronary artery disease. Despite an exhaustive search for an effective pharmacotherapy to treat or prevent restenosis, hundreds of clinical trials have failed to identify an agent with proven therapeutic benefit. Recently, however, the Food and Drug Administration approved intracoronary radiation (brachytherapy) and drug-eluting stents as viable therapeutic options for in-stent restenosis. In addition, recent randomized trials have shown encouraging results with drug-eluting stents. This
    [Show full text]
  • World Journal of Cardiology
    World Journal of W J C Cardiology Submit a Manuscript: http://www.f6publishing.com World J Cardiol 2017 August 26; 9(8): 640-651 DOI: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i8.640 ISSN 1949-8462 (online) REVIEW Diagnosis and management challenges of in-stent restenosis in coronary arteries M Chadi Alraies, Fahed Darmoch, Ramyashree Tummala, Ron Waksman M Chadi Alraies, Ron Waksman, Heart and Vascular Institute, Article in press: July 17, 2017 Department of Interventional Cardiology, Georgetown University/ Published online: August 26, 2017 MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC 20010, United States Fahed Darmoch, Ramyashree Tummala, Internal Medicine Department, St Vincent Charity Medical Center/Case Western Abstract Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44115, United States Over the course of the 3 decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation transformed Author contributions: Alraies MC prepared the outline re­ the practice of cardiology. PCI with stenting is currently viewed the literature and contributed with more than 80% to the most widely performed procedure for the treatment the manuscript write up; Darmoch F reviewed pathogenesis, incidence and management sections and contributed with the table of symptomatic coronary disease. In large trials, drug- and imaging; Tummala R wrote the pathogenesis, incidence and eluting stents (DES) have led to a significant reduction edited management sections; and Waksman R review the whole in in-stent restenosis (ISR) rates, one of the major manuscript, made critical changes according to the reviewers’ limitations of bare-metal stents. Due to these favorable comments. findings, DES was rapidly and widely adopted enabling more complex coronary interventions. Nevertheless, ISR Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have no conflict of remains a serious concern as late stent complications.
    [Show full text]
  • Decreasing Restenosis Following Angioplasty the Potential of Peroxisome Proliferator–Activated Receptor ␥ Agonists
    EDITORIAL (SEE CHOI ET AL, P. 2654) Decreasing Restenosis Following Angioplasty The potential of peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor ␥ agonists atients with type 2 diabetes are dis- Thiazolidinediones are a class of perior effects to metformin in protecting proportionately affected by car- drugs that have been developed as insulin the vasculature. Furthermore, markers of P diovascular disease (CVD), and sensitizers and are effective in the treat- inflammation were decreased to a greater cardiovascular events are a major cause ment of hyperglycemia in diabetes. Their extent in the rosiglitazone-treated group, for morbidity and mortality in this popu- mechanism of action is related to their supporting the association between vas- lation. Despite significant improvements activity as agonists to peroxisome prolif- cular events and inflammation. These in the management of CVD, patients with erator–activated receptor ␥ (PPAR-␥), a findings confirm the benefits seen with diabetes continue to be seriously im- receptor that is present in several tissues other thiazolidinediones following angio- pacted by this problem (1). While treat- including the vasculature (14). Troglita- plasty (21), although one small study ments with lipid-lowering therapy and zone, the first drug in this class, was with- demonstrated no effect with rosiglitazone aggressive blood pressure lowering have drawn due to liver toxicity. Rosiglitazone (22). been particularly effective in reducing and pioglitazone are thiazolidinediones There appears to be a strong theoret- cardiovascular events, treatments to re- that are currently available for the treat- ical basis for these findings. Arterial reste- duce blood glucose have had a less im- ment of diabetes, and several agonists to nosis is associated with an intensive ␥ ␣ pressive impact on macrovascular PPAR- , as well as dual agonists to the vascular smooth muscle cell (VSMC) pro- ␥ complications (2).
    [Show full text]