Key result
High neointimal inhomogeneity was not associated with an increased incidence of major periprocedural myocardial injury compared to low inhomogeneity in patients undergoing PCI for in-stent restenosis (31.2% vs. 31.2%, p=1.000).
Why the study?
The study investigated the impact of increasing neointimal inhomogeneity, neoatherosclerosis, and treatment modality of in-stent restenosis on periprocedural myocardial injury occurrence.
Does neointimal inhomogeneity or treatment modality (DCB vs DES) impact the occurrence of periprocedural myocardial injury in patients undergoing PCI for in-stent restenosis?
Cohort (n=128)
No
Does neointimal inhomogeneity or treatment modality (DCB vs DES) impact the occurrence of periprocedural myocardial injury in patients undergoing PCI for in-stent restenosis?
In patients undergoing PCI for in-stent restenosis, neither neointimal inhomogeneity nor the choice of treatment modality (DCB vs. DES) significantly impacted the occurrence of periprocedural myocardial injury.
Neointimal inhomogeneity does not appear to elevate periprocedural injury risk in ISR PCI; leaves open whether imaging refines lesion selection.
Aims Aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of increasing neointimal inhomogeneity and neoatherosclerosis as well as of treatment modality of in-stent restenosis (ISR) on the occurrence of periprocedural myocardial injury (PMI). Methods and results Patients with normal or stable/falling increased baseline high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) undergoing intravascular optical coherence tomography (OCT) and subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ISR by means of drug-coated balloon (DCB) or drug-eluting stent (DES) were included. Overall, 128 patients were subdivided into low (n = 64) and high (n = 64) inhomogeneity groups, based on the median of distribution of non-homogeneous quadrants. No significant between-group differences were detected in terms of hs-cTnT changes (28.0 [12.0–65.8] vs. 25.5 [9.8–65.0] ng/L; p = 0.355), or the incidence of major PMI (31.2 vs. 31.2%; p = 1.000). Similarly, no differences were observed between DCB- and DES-treated groups in terms of hs-cTn changes (27.0 [10.0–64.0] vs. 28.0 [11.0–73.0] ng/L; p = 0.795), or the incidence of major PMI (28.9 vs. 35.6%; p = 0.566). Additionally, no significant interaction was present between optical neointimal characteristics and treatment modality in terms of changes in hs-cTnT (Pint = 0.432). No significant differences in PMI occurrence were observed between low and high neoatherosclerosis subgroups. Conclusions In patients undergoing PCI for ISR, there was no association between increasing neointimal inhomogeneity, or increasing expression of neoatherosclerotic changes and occurrence of PMI. PMI occurrence was not influenced by the treatment modality (DCB vs. DES) of ISR lesions, a finding that supports the safety of DCB treatment for ISR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nano et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in In-stent restenosis (n=128). High neointimal inhomogeneity vs. Low neointimal inhomogeneity was evaluated on Incidence of major periprocedural myocardial injury (PMI) (p=1.000). High neointimal inhomogeneity was not associated with an increased incidence of major periprocedural myocardial injury compared to low inhomogeneity in patients undergoing PCI for in-stent restenosis (31.2% vs. 31.2%, p=1.000).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: