Propensity and mechanisms of restenosis in different coronary stent designs
Complementary value of the analysis of the luminal gain-loss relationship
Javier Escaned, MD, PhDa,
Javier Goicolea, MD, PhDa,
Fernando Alfonso, MD, PhDa,
Maria José Perez-Vizcayno, MDa,
Rosana Hernandez, MD, PhDa,
Antonio Fernandez-Ortiz, MD, PhDa,
Camino Bañuelos, MD, PhDa and
Carlos Macaya, MD, PhDa
a Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
View larger version (50K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1 Baseline and postprocedural quantitative angiography data in the four stent designs. *Differences between stent design with a Fisher PSLD with p < 0.05. MLD = minimal luminal diameter.
|
|
View larger version (43K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2 Changes in luminal dimensions induced by the four stent designs, derived from data in Figure 1. *Differences between stent designs with a Fisher PSLD with p < 0.05.
|
|
View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3 Percent diameter stenosis at follow-up for the four stent designs studied, displayed as cumulative frequency distribution curves.
|
|
View larger version (31K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4 Late luminal loss per quartile of initial luminal gain observed in the four stent designs studied. The bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
|
|
|
