Why the study?
Does elevated baseline plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) predict rapid progression of coronary atherosclerosis in patients undergoing repeat coronary angiography after successful PCI?
Does elevated baseline plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) predict rapid progression of coronary atherosclerosis in patients undergoing repeat coronary angiography after successful PCI?
Elevated baseline plasma CRP levels independently predict rapid angiographic progression of coronary atherosclerosis in patients presenting with recurrent symptoms after PCI.
May aid post-PCI risk stratification in symptomatic patients; leaves open whether CRP-targeted therapy alters progression.
BACKGROUND: High plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) levels have been associated with an unfavorable outcome in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), and a direct participation of CRP in the atherosclerotic process has been postulated. HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible relationship of high plasma CRP levels with the rapid progression of coronary atherosclerosis (RPCAD). METHODS: In all, 194 patients who were readmitted and underwent repeat coronary angiography because of recurrence of symptoms following successful percutaneous coronary intervention were studied. Median angiographic follow-up time was 6 months. Rapid progression CAD was defined as the presence of a new lesion, > 25% in luminal diameter stenosis, in a previously nondiseased vessel, or deterioration of a known, nontreated lesion by at least 25%. RESULTS: By multivariate analysis, patients with high plasma CRP levels upon first admission were at higher risk of RPCAD. In particular, odds ration (OR) = 1.8; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.3-3.6; p value = 0.02 in patients with CRP = 0.5-2 mg/dl versus patients with CRP < 0.5 mg/dl, and OR = 7.1; 95% CI = 3.8-9.5; p value < 0.001 in patients with CRP > 2 mg/dl versus patients with CRP < 0.5 mg/dl. CONCLUSION: Increased plasma CRP levels could possibly identify patients at high risk for the development of RPCAD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zairis et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: