Postprocedural Minimal Luminal Diameter Research Articles

Impact factors of in-stent restenosis following successful stent implantation for acquired severe pulmonary vein stenosis post atrial fibrillation ablation

Objective: To investigate the influencing factors of in-stent restenosis (ISR) following successful stent implantation in patients with ablation-associated severe pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) who undergo atrial fibrillation ablation. Methods: Data of patients who underwent pulmonary vein angiography to confirm PVS after radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) and received pulmonary vein stenting at Shanghai Chest Hospital from March 2010 to December 2017 were retrospectively analysed. All patients were followed up for a long period of time (pulmonary vein contract-enhanced CT within 6 to 12 months after operation was performed, and pulmonary angiography was performed if CT indicated stenosis>50%). The incidence of ISR was recorded. According to angiography, the patients were divided into ISR group and non-ISR group. The clinical and intraoperative imaging characteristics and interventional data were compared between the two groups. Logistic regression was used to analyse the influencing factors of ISR. Results: A total of 47 patients ((47.1±12.2) years old) were enrolled in this study, including 28 males(59.6%). There were 19 cases in ISR group and 28 cases in non-ISR group. Compared with the non-ISR group, the ISR group received more pulmonary vein isolation ((2.8±0.9) vs. (1.8±1.3), P=0.02), and the interval between last ablation and stenting was longer ((19.4±9.6) vs. (13.0±12.4), P=0.03). The incidence of ISR in patients with stent diameter≤8 mm was significantly higher than those with stent diameter>8 mm (33.3%(20/60) vs. 8.1%(3/37), P<0.01). Logistic regression analysis found that the number of radiofrequency ablation>1 (OR=2.1, 95%CI 1.3-3.9, P=0.02), and the time from the last ablation to stent placement>12 months (OR=1.5, 95%CI 1.1-2.5, P=0.03), reference diameter of stenosed distal vessel (OR=0.7, 95%CI 0.5-0.9, P=0.04), post procedural minimal luminal diameter (OR=0.4, 95%CI 0.2-0.8, P=0.02) and stent diameter (OR=0.6, 95%CI 0.3-0.9, P=0.03) were independent factors of ISR. Conclusions: The greater number of radiofrequency ablations and the longer time from the last ablation to stent placement increase the risk of ISR. The larger reference diameter of the stenosed distal vessel, stent diameter and post procedural minimal luminal diameter are the protective factors of ISR.

Drug-Eluting Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Complex Femoropopliteal Arterial Lesions: The DRASTICO Study

BackgroundDrug-eluting technologies improve 12-month angiographic results of femoropopliteal (FP) interventions, but few data on the comparison between drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and drug-eluting stents (DES) are available. ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare, after balloon pre-dilation, a strategy of DCB followed by provisional self-expanding nitinol bare-metal stent implantation with a strategy of systematic DES implantation in patients at high risk for FP restenosis. MethodsPatients presenting with either intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia undergoing FP intervention were randomly assigned 1:1 to DCB or DES after successful target lesion pre-dilation. The primary endpoint was 12-month target lesion binary restenosis, assessed using Doppler ultrasound. Secondary endpoints were freedom from target lesion revascularization and from major amputation. ResultsA total of 192 patients, 96 in the DCB group and 96 in the DES group, with 240 lesions in 225 limbs, were included. Diabetes and critical limb ischemia were present in >50% in both groups. Mean lesion length was 14 cm, and baseline target lesion occlusion reached about 60% of cases in both groups. The systematic DES strategy yielded larger post-procedural minimal luminal diameter and a lower incidence of residual dissection compared to DCB, in which nitinol stents were used in only 21% of the lesions. Twelve-month target lesion restenosis was observed in 22% of DCB-treated versus 21% of DES-treated patients (p = 0.90). Clinically driven target lesion revascularization was necessary in 14% of DCB patients versus 17% of DES patients (p = 0.50). ConclusionsDCB was not superior to DES in the treatment of complex FP lesions in a high-risk population, yielding similar rate of restenosis and clinically driven target lesion revascularization. (Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Angioplasty With Provisional Use of Nitinol Stent Versus Systematic Implantation of Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Femoropopliteal De Novo Lesions; NCT01969630)

Comparison of Drug-Eluting Versus Bare Metal Stents in Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy

Although not a definitive treatment, percutaneous coronary intervention offers a palliative benefit to patients with cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Given the superior outcomes with drug-eluting stents (DESs) over bare metal stents (BMSs) in native coronary artery disease, similar improvements might be expected in transplant patients; however, the results have been mixed. Consecutive cardiac transplantation recipients at a single center receiving a stent for de novo cardiac allograft vasculopathy from 1997 to 2009 were retrospectively analyzed according to receipt of a DES versus a BMS. The angiographic and clinical outcomes were subsequently evaluated at 1 year. The baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were similar among those receiving DESs (n = 18) and BMSs (n = 16). Quantitative coronary angiography revealed no difference in the reference diameter, lesion length, or pre-/postprocedural minimal luminal diameter. At the 12-month angiographic follow-up visit, the mean lumen loss was significantly lower in the DES group than in the BMS group (0.19 ± 0.73 mm vs 0.76 ± 0.97 mm, p = 0.02). The DES group also had a lower rate of in-stent restenosis (12.5% vs 33%, p = 0.18), as well as a significantly lower rate of target lesion revascularization (0% vs 19%, p = 0.03). At 1 year, DESs were associated with a lower composite rate of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (12% vs 38%, p = 0.04). In conclusion, DESs are safe and effective in the suppression of neointimal hyperplasia after percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiac allograft vasculopathy, resulting in significantly lower rates of late lumen loss and target lesion revascularization, as well as a reduced combined rate of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction.

True coronary bifurcation lesions: meta-analysis and review of literature

Percutaneous intervention of true coronary bifurcation lesions is challenging. Based on the results of randomized trials and registry data, the approach of stenting of main vessel only with balloon dilatation of the side branch has become the default approach for false bifurcation lesions except when a complication occurs or in cases of suboptimal result. However, the optimal stenting strategy for true coronary bifurcation lesions - to stent or not to stent the side branch - is still a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of the double stent technique (stenting of the main branch and side branch) over the single stent technique (stenting of main vessel only with balloon dilatation of the side branch) for treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions, with drug-eluting stents (DES). Comparative studies published between January 2000 and February 2009 of the double stent technique vs. single stent technique with DES for true coronary bifurcations were identified using an electronic search and reviewed using a random effects model. The primary endpoints of our study were side-branch and main-branch restenoses, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at longest available follow-up. The secondary endpoints of our analysis were postprocedural minimal luminal diameter (MLD) of the side branch and main branch, follow-up MLD of side branch and main branch and stent thrombosis. Heterogeneity was assessed and sensitivity analysis was performed to test the robustness of the overall summary odds ratios (ORs). Five studies comprising 1145 patients (616 single stent and 529 double stent) were included in the analysis. Three studies were randomized comparisons between the two techniques for true coronary bifurcation lesions. Incomplete reporting of data in the primary studies was common. The lengths of clinical and angiographic follow-up ranged between 6 and 12 months and 6 and 7 months, respectively. Postprocedural MLD of the side branch was significantly smaller in the single stent group [standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.71, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.54, P < 0.000, I2 = 0%]. The odds of side-branch restenosis (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.47-2.67, P = 0.81, I2 = 76%), main-branch restenois (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56-1.39, P = 0.58, I = 0%), all-cause mortality (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.11-2.45, P = 0.41, I2 = 0%), MI (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.34-2.54, P = 0.87, I = 49%) and TLR (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46-1.65, P = 0.68, I2 = 0%) were similar between the two groups. Postprocedural MLD of the main branch [standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.08, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.26, P < 0.65, I2 = 67%], follow-up MLD of side branch (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.01, P < 0.31, I2 = 15%) and main branch MLD (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.542, P < 0.35, I2 = 65%) were also similar between the two groups. In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for true coronary bifurcations, there is no added advantage of stenting both branches as compared with a conventional one-stent strategy. The results, however, need to be interpreted considering the poor study methods and/or poor quality of reporting in publications. We propose to move forward and consider the conduct of more systematic, well-designed and scientific trials to investigate the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions.

Re-examining minimal luminal diameter relocation and quantitative coronary angiography – intravascular ultrasound correlations in stented saphenous vein grafts: methodological

Angiographic parameters (such as late luminal loss) are common endpoints in drug-eluting stent trials, but their correlation with the neointimal process and their reliability in predicting restenosis are debated. Using quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) data (49 bare metal stent and 44 sirolimus-eluting stent lesions) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) data (39 bare metal stent and 34 sirolimus-eluting stent lesions) from the randomised Reduction of Restenosis In Saphenous vein grafts with Cypher stent (RRISC) trial, we analysed the "relocation phenomenon" of QCA-based in-stent minimal luminal diameter (MLD) between post-procedure and follow-up and we correlated QCA-based and IVUS-based restenotic parameters in stented saphenous vein grafts. We expected the presence of MLD relocation for low late loss values, as MLD can "migrate" along the stent if minimal re-narrowing occurs, while we anticipated follow-up MLD to be located close to post-procedural MLD position for higher late loss. QCA-based MLD relocation occurred frequently: the site of MLD shifted from post-procedure to follow-up an "absolute" distance of 5.8 mm [2.5-10.2] and a "relative" value of 29% [10-46]. MLD relocation failed to correlate with in-stent late loss (rho = 0.14 for "absolute" MLD relocation [p = 0.17], and rho=0.03 for "relative" relocation [p = 0.811). Follow-up QCA-based and IVUS-based MLD values well correlated in the overall population (rho = 0.76, p < 0.001), but QCA underestimated MLD on average 0.55 +/- 0.49 mm, and this was mainly evident for lower MLD values. Conversely, the location of QCA-based MLD failed to correlate with the location of IVUS-based MLD (rho = 0.01 for "absolute" values--in mm [p = 0.911, rho = 0.19 for "relative" values--in % [p = 0.111). Overall, the ability of late loss to "predict" IVUS parameters of restenosis (maximum neointimal hyperplasia diameter, neointimal hyperplasia index and maximum neointimal hyperplasia area) was moderate (rho between 0.46 and 0.54 for the 3 IVUS parameters). These findings suggest the need for a critical re-evaluation of angiographic parameters (such as late loss) as endpoints for drug-eluting stent trials and the use of more precise techniques to describe accurately and properly the restenotic process.

Long-term (three-year) outcomes after stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in patients with normal left ventricular function

The purpose of this study was to analyze long-term follow-up information from patients treated with stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. Stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis is often performed in selected patients, but the long-term safety of this therapy is not yet established. Between January 1995 and September 2000, 270 consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis and normal left ventricular function who underwent treatment at 4 clinical centers were included in this study. Data were forwarded to the coordinating center using a standard case report form. The procedural success rate was 98.9%. There were no deaths, 3 stent thromboses, and 3 Q-wave myocardial infarctions during the hospitalization. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 237 patients (follow-up rate 87.8%), and the restenosis rate was 21.1%. The reference size was an independent predictor of binary restenosis (odds ratio 0.543, 95% confidence interval 0.308 to 0.957, p = 0.03). During the follow-up period (32.3 ± 18.5 months), there were 20 deaths (8 cardiac, 12 noncardiac) and 5 nonfatal myocardial infarctions. Target and new lesion revascularizations were required in 45 (16.7%) and 31 (11.5%) patients, respectively. The cumulative probabilities free from major adverse cardiac events were 81.9 ± 2.4%, 78.4 ± 2.6%, and 77.7 ± 2.7%, respectively, at 1, 2, and 3 years. Combined coronary artery disease and postprocedural minimal luminal diameter were the significant predictors of major adverse cardiac events. Thus, the long-term prognosis of patients after stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis was favorable in selected patients with normal left ventricular function.

Long-term Clinical and Angiographic Results of Coronary Stenting in Diabetic Patients

Background:Diabetes is a major risk factor for restenosis and high mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. The impact of coronary stenting on the clinical outcome of diabetic patients remains controversial. Method:The in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes of 104 consecutive diabetic (60±8 year-old, 74 male) and age-matched 193 control (57±10 year-old, 162 male) patents underwent coronary stenting between January 1998 and March 1999 at Chonnam National University Hospital were compared. Results:1) Coronary stenting was successful in 98% of diabetic patients and 97% of non-diabetic patients. Post-procedural minimal luminal diameter (MLD) was not different between two groups (2.89±0.42 vs. 2.95±0.62 mm), but follow-up MLD was lower in diabetics than that in non-diabetics (1.70±0.96 vs. 2.05±0.72 mm, p<0.05). 2) Restenosis rate on follow-up coronary angiograpy was not different between two groups (40.7% in diabetics and 32.0% in non-diabetics. 3) In-hospital outcome was not different between two groups. Long-term clinical follow-up (16±11 months) revealed higher overall major adverse cardiac events in diabetics than in non-diabetics (38.7 vs. 30.7%, p<0.05). Conclusion:Coronary stenting in diabetics can be performed with acceptable short-term results. However, long-term clinical outcome in diabetic patients was worse than in non-diabetics. (Korean Circulation J 2001;31(1):24-30)

Periprocedural quantitative coronary angiography after Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation predicts the restenosis rate at six months: Results of a meta-analysis of the belgian netherlands stent study (BENESTENT) I, BENESTENT II pilot, BENESTENT II and MUSIC trials

OBJECTIVESWe aimed to identify periprocedural quantitative coronary angiographic (QCA) variables that have predictive value on long-term angiographic results and to construct multivariate models using these variables for postprocedural prognosis.BACKGROUNDCoronary stent implantation has reduced the restenosis rate significantly as compared with balloon angioplasty in short de novo lesions in coronary arteries >3 mm in size. Although the postprocedural minimal luminal diameter (MLD) is known to have significant bearing on long-term angiographic results, no practically useful model exists for prediction of angiographic outcome based on the periprocedural QCA variables.METHODSThe QCA data from patients who underwent Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation for short (<15 mm) de novo lesions in coronary arteries >3 mm and completed six months of angiographic follow-up in the four prospective clinical trials (BENESTENT I, BENESTENT II pilot, BENESTENT II and MUSIC) were pooled. Multiple models were constructed using multivariate analysis. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was used to identify the model of best fit, and this model was used to construct a reference chart for prediction of angiographic outcome on the basis of periprocedural QCA variables.RESULTSUnivariate analysis performed using QCA variables revealed that vessel size, MLD before and after the procedure, reference area before and after the procedure, minimal luminal cross-sectional area before and after the procedure, diameter stenosis after the procedure, area of plaque after the procedure and area stenosis after the procedure were significant predictors of angiographic outcome. Using multivariate analysis, the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test showed that the model containing percent diameter stenosis after the procedure and vessel size best fit the data. A reference chart was then developed to calculate the expected restenosis rate.CONCLUSIONSRestenosis rate after stent implantation for short lesions can be predicted using the variables percent diameter stenosis after the procedure and vessel size. This meta-analysis indicates that the concept of “the bigger the better” holds true for coronary stent implantation. Applicability of the model beyond short lesions should be tested.

Clinical and angiographic outcome of stenting following suboptimal results of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in small (

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of stenting following suboptimal percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in angiographically small coronary arteries. The clinical and angiographic outcome of unplanned stenting in 33 patients with coronary arteries <2.5 mm in diameter was studied. Procedural success was achieved for 97.0% with a greater initial gain (1.79 +/- 0.60 vs. 1.34 +/- 0.58 mm, P < 0.05) and larger postprocedural minimal luminal diameter (2.19 +/- 0.43 vs. 1.57 +/- 0.57 mm, P < 0.001) than that in the size-matched elective PTCA patients. Trends toward a lower restenosis rate and a significant reduction in target lesion revascularization (7.1% vs. 41.9%, P < 0.01) were observed in the stented patients, suggesting the feasibility and efficacy of stenting following suboptimal PTCA in small coronary arteries. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 47:269-276, 1999.

Directional coronary atherectomy for the treatment of Palmaz-Schatz in-stent restenosis

Management of in-stent restenosis has become a significant challenge in interventional cardiology. The results of balloon angioplasty have been disappointing due to the high recurrence of restenosis at follow-up. Debulking of the restenotic tissue within the stents using directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) may offer a therapeutic advantage. We report the immediate clinical and angiographic outcomes and long-term clinical follow-up results of 45 patients (46 lesions), mean age 63 ± 12 years, 73% men, with a mean reference diameter of 2.9 ± 0.6 mm, treated with DCA for symptomatic Palmaz-Schatz in-stent restenosis. DCA was performed successfully in all 46 lesions and resulted in a postprocedural minimal luminal diameter of 2.7 ± 0.7 mm and a residual diameter stenosis of 17 ± 10%. There were no in-hospital deaths, Q-wave myocardial infarctions, or emergency coronary artery bypass surgeries. Four patients (9%) suffered a non–Q-wave myocardial infarction. Target lesion revascularization was 28.3% at a mean follow-up of 10 ± 4.6 months. Kaplan-Meier event-free survival (freedom from death, myocardial infarction, and repeat target lesion revascularization) was 71.2% and 64.7% at 6 and 12 months after DCA, respectively. Thus, DCA is safe and efficacious for the treatment of Palmaz-Schatz in-stent restenosis. It results in a large postprocedural minimal luminal diameter and a low rate of both target lesion revascularization and combined major clinical events at follow-up.

Comparison of Primary Coronary Stenting to Primary Balloon Angioplasty With Stent Bailout for the Treatment of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction

This study compares the immediate and long-term outcomes of a primary coronary stenting strategy with primary balloon angioplasty with stent bailout in the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). One hundred forty-seven consecutive patients who underwent primary balloon angioplasty with stent bailout (n = 94) or primary stenting (n = 53) for AMI were clinically followed for 8.1 ± 5.7 and 8.5 ± 4.5 months, respectively. Immediate results, as well as in-hospital and long-term ischemic events (death, reinfarction, and repeat revascularization) were compared between both groups. Angiographic success was 91.5% in the balloon angioplasty group and 94% in the stent group. In-hospital and late follow-up combined ischemic events were 22 of 94 (23%) versus 0 of 53 (0%); p <0.001 and 33 of 78 (42%) versus 13 of 53 (25%), p = 0.04 for the balloon angioplasty and stent groups, respectively. At 6 months, the cumulative probability of repeat target lesion revascularization was higher in the balloon angioplasty group (47% vs 18%, p = 0.0006) as was the probability of late target revascularization (36% vs 18%, p = 0.046); the cumulative event-free survival after 6 months was significantly lower in the balloon angioplasty group (44% vs 80%, p = 0.0001). This study demonstrates that a primary stent placement strategy in patients with AMI is safe, feasible, and superior to primary balloon angioplasty with stent bailout. Primary stenting results in a larger postprocedural minimal luminal diameter, a lower early and late recurrent ischemic event rate, and a lower incidence of target lesion revascularization at follow-up.