Why the study?
Does coronary stenting of occluded coronary arteries compared to non-occluded arteries result in different restenosis rates?
Does coronary stenting of occluded coronary arteries compared to non-occluded arteries result in different restenosis rates?
Coronary stenting of occluded and non-occluded arteries matched for lesion and stent characteristics yields similar 6-month angiographic restenosis rates.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Stenting occluded lesions was associated with similar restenosis rates as non-occluded; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
AIMS: It is not known whether the higher restenosis rates reported after balloon angioplasty of occluded as opposed to non-occluded coronary arteries are still found after placement of coronary stents in lesions matched for factors known to affect late angiographic outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a retrospective analysis of 1276 patients who had undergone coronary stent placement and in whom 6-month angiographic follow-up was available, we identified 144 patients with a total coronary occlusion which matched a non-occluded coronary lesion in another 144 patients. Matching lesion pairs were of the same type (de novo or restenotic), were supplied with the same type of stent, had reference vessel diameters identical within 0.3 mm and stented vessel segment lengths identical within 8 mm, and were located in corresponding target vessels. After stenting, statistically identical minimal lumen diameters had been achieved in both groups (occluded: 2.74+/-0.35 mm, non-occluded: 2. 77+/-0.32 mm, P = 0.45). At follow-up, minimal lumen diameters were not different (occluded: 1.65+/-0.77 mm, non-occluded: 1.76+/-0.76 mm, P = 0.24), reflecting an identical late lumen loss for occlusions (1.09+/-0.76 mm) and non-occluded lesions (1.01+/-0.70 mm, P = 0.38). Because of the significantly larger acute gain, the loss index was significantly lower for occluded vessels (0.40+/-0.27 vs 0. 51+/-0.35, P = 0.003). Corresponding restenosis rates were 33% (occluded) and 28% (non-occluded;P = 0.44). For stented vessel segment lengths >18 mm, restenosis rates were markedly higher (occluded: 42%, non-occluded: 36%) than for stented vessel segment lengths </=18 mm (occluded: 25%, non-occluded: 22%). CONCLUSIONS: In occluded and non-occluded coronary lesions matched for factors known to affect the angiographic outcome, no difference between the respective restenosis rates was observed within 6 months of coronary stenting. Thus, either type of coronary lesion appears to exhibit the same propensity for neointimal hyperplasia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schofer et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: