Key result
In patients treated with drug-eluting stents, diabetes mellitus was associated with similar neointimal obstruction and vessel response at 6 to 9 months compared to non-diabetic patients.
Why the study?
Does diabetes mellitus alter vessel response and neointimal hyperplasia in patients treated with drug-eluting stents?
Cohort (n=971)
Does diabetes mellitus alter vessel response and neointimal hyperplasia in patients treated with drug-eluting stents?
In the drug-eluting stent era, smaller follow-up lumen in diabetic patients is primarily driven by smaller postprocedure lumen rather than exaggerated neointimal hyperplasia.
Similar neointimal response after DES in diabetes; leaves open whether post-procedure lumen optimization improves diabetic outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Exaggerated neointimal hyperplasia is considered as the primary mechanism for increased restenosis in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) treated with bare-metal stent. However, the vessel response in DM and non-DM treated with different drug-eluting stents (DES) has not been systematically evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated 3D intravascular ultrasound (postprocedure and 6 to 9 months) in 971 patients (267 with DM and 704 without DM) treated with sirolimus- (n=104), paclitaxel- (n=303), zotarolimus- (n=391), or everolimus- (n=173) eluting stents. Volumetric data were standardized by length as volume index (VI). At postprocedure, lumen VI at the stented segment was significantly smaller in DM than in non-DM, whereas vessel VI was similar between the 2 groups. At follow-up, neointimal obstruction and maximum cross-sectional narrowing (neointimal area/stent area) were not significantly different between the 2 groups with no interaction for the DES type. Consequently, lumen VI was smaller in DM than in non-DM at follow-up. In the reference segments, residual plaque burden at postprocedure was significantly greater in DM than in non-DM, although change in lumen VI was similar between the 2 groups. The arterial responses at the reference segments also showed no interaction for the DES type. CONCLUSIONS: DM and non-DM lesions showed similar vessel response in both in-stent and reference segments regardless of the DES type. In the DES era, the follow-up lumen in DM patients seems to be determined primarily by the smaller lumen at postprocedure rather than exaggerated neointima within the stent or plaque proliferation at the reference segments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sakata et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease requiring stenting (n=971). Diabetes Mellitus (exposure) vs. Non-Diabetes Mellitus was evaluated on Neointimal obstruction and maximum cross-sectional narrowing at follow-up. In patients treated with drug-eluting stents, diabetes mellitus was associated with similar neointimal obstruction and vessel response at 6 to 9 months compared to non-diabetic patients.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: