CLINICAL STUDIES
Angiographic and intravascular ultrasound predictors of in-stent restenosis
Shunji Kasaoka, MDa,
Jonathan M. Tobis, MD, FACCa,
Tatsuro Akiyama, MD*,
Bernhard Reimers, MD*,
Carlo Di Mario, MD, FACC*,
Nathan D. Wong, PhDa and
Antonio Colombo, MD, FACC*
a University of California, Irvine, California, USA
* Centro Cuore Columbus, Milan, Italy
Manuscript received January 26, 1998;
revised manuscript received July 7, 1998,
accepted July 24, 1998.
Address for correspondence: Dr. Jonathan M. Tobis, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of California at Irvine, 101 City Drive South, Building 53, Route 81, Room 100, Orange, California 92868-3298
jmtobis{at}uci.edu
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Objectives. This study was performed to determine predictors of in-stent restenosis from a high volume, single-center practice.
Background. Intracoronary stents have been shown to reduce the restenosis rate as compared with balloon angioplasty, but in-stent restenosis continues to be an important clinical problem.
Methods. Between April 1993 and March 1997, 1,706 patients with 2,343 lesions were treated with a variety of intracoronary stents. The majority of stents were placed with high pressure balloon inflations and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance. Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 1,173 patients with 1,633 lesions (70%). Clinical, angiographic and IVUS variables were prospectively recorded and analyzed by univariate and multivariate models for the ability to predict the occurrence of in-stent restenosis defined as a diameter stenosis  50%.
Results. In-stent restenosis was angiographically documented in 282 patients with 409 lesions (25%). The restenosis group had a significantly longer total stent length, smaller reference lumen diameter, smaller final minimal lumen diameter (MLD) by angiography and smaller stent lumen cross-sectional area (CSA) by IVUS. In lesions where IVUS guidance was used, the restenosis rate was 24% as compared with 29% if IVUS was not used (p < 0.05). By multivariate logistic regression analysis, longer total stent length, smaller reference lumen diameter and smaller final MLD were strong predictors of in-stent restenosis. In lesions with IVUS guidance, IVUS stent lumen CSA was a better independent predictor than the angiographic measurements.
Conclusions. Achieving an optimal stent lumen CSA by using IVUS guidance during the procedure and minimizing the total stent length may reduce in-stent restenosis.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | CSA | = cross-sectional area | | %DS | = percent diameter stenosis | | IVUS | = intravascular ultrasound | | MLD | = minimal lumen diameter | | OR | = odds ratio |
|
Intracoronary stents have been shown to reduce the rate of restenosis as compared with balloon angioplasty (1–4), but in-stent restenosis continues to be an important clinical problem (5–9). It has been reported that final minimal lumen diameter (MLD) by angiography is the best inverse predictor of restenosis (10); however, Nakamura et al. (11) showed that angiography overestimated the adequacy of acute stent expansion and the size of post-stent lumen diameters. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) permits detailed cross-sectional imaging of the coronary arteries (12) and has been used to optimize stent deployment (13,14). The incremental effect of this approach on restenosis is unclear. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the clinical, angiographic and ultrasound predictors of in-stent restenosis from a single-center, large-volume experience.
|
Methods
|
|---|
Patients.
Intracoronary stents were deployed in 1,706 consecutive patients with 2,343 lesions between April 1993 and March 1997. Angiographic follow-up was requested in all patients within 6 months and was obtained in 1,173 patients (69%) with 1,633 stented lesions (70%). This group of patients with angiographic follow-up constituted the study group. The only patients excluded from this analysis were those with restenosis lesions from a previous stent implantation.
Clinical, angiographic and IVUS variables were analyzed to describe the study group and to determine predictors of angiographic restenosis. Follow-up coronary angiography was performed at a median of 5.1 months (range 1 to 34) after stent implantation. Angiographic restenosis was defined as 50% diameter reduction of the mean proximal and distal reference lumens. Patients were classified into two groups: 891 patients (1,224 lesions) without restenosis and 282 patients (409 lesions) with restenosis.
Stent implantation procedure.
Intracoronary stenting was performed by using techniques that have been previously described (13). The Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent (Cordis, Johnson & Johnson Company) was the stent most commonly used (46%). Other stents were used in 45% of lesions, and a combination of stents was used in 9% of lesions. After intracoronary stent implantation, angiographic optimization was performed by using high pressure balloon dilations (>14 atm) to achieve a satisfactory angiographic result with <20% residual stenosis by visual estimate. The mean final balloon pressure was 16.1 ± 3.2 atm. After the angiographic result was considered acceptable, such that the procedure would ordinarily be terminated, IVUS was performed. IVUS imaging was obtained in 921 patients (79%) with 1,248 lesions (76%). Alternatively, IVUS imaging was obtained before any intervention or after the first predilation in 218 lesions (13%). The measured IVUS lumen area was used to choose the balloon for expanding the stent. If IVUS imaging was not available, a balloon diameter was chosen that was 0.5 mm larger than the angiographic reference lumen diameter. The mean balloon/artery ratio was 1.2 ± 0.2. Total stent length was defined as the sum of the length of all stents implanted for each lesion.
Quantitative coronary angiographic analysis was performed using digital calipers by experienced angiographers not involved in the stent procedure. MLD, reference lumen diameter and percent diameter stenosis (%DS) before and after stent implantation and at follow-up were measured.
IVUS studies were obtained as previously described (13). The lumen cross-sectional area (CSA) was measured at the proximal and distal reference sites and at the most narrowed point within the stent.
Statistical analysis.
Statistical analysis was performed on a Power Macintosh 8500 with commercially available software programs (Statview 4.5, Abacus Concept Inc., and JMP 3.1, SAS Institute Inc.). Data were expressed as the mean value ± SD. Differences between groups were evaluated by the chi-square test or the Fisher exact test for categoric variables and the Student t test for continuous variables. P values <0.05 were considered significant.
Univariate logistic regression analysis was used to select the clinical, angiographic or IVUS predictors of angiographic restenosis. Univariate predictors of angiographic restenosis with a p value <0.05 were entered into a multivariate logistic model. A backward elimination was used to select independent predictors. A p value <0.05 was required for all variables to be included in the final multivariate stepwise model. The odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals are presented in the tables for the final multivariate model. The OR was calculated as
where ß is the estimate and x equals the unit measurement for continuous variables. For MLD and reference lumen diameter, the unit of measurement was taken as 1 mm; for stent length it was 10 mm; for CSA it was 1 mm2; and for age it was 10 years. An OR >1 means an increase in the predicted risk of restenosis for the variable listed.
|
Results
|
|---|
Comparison of patients with and without restenosis.
In-stent restenosis was angiographically documented in 282 patients (24%) with 409 lesions (25%). As shown in Table 1, the restenosis group had older patients and had patients with a greater frequency of hypercholesterolemia, diabetes and previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The restenosis group also had a higher incidence of saphenous vein grafts, type C lesions, dissection and multiple stents and had a longer total stent length. Figure 1 demonstrates the correlation between the total stent length and in-stent restenosis rate. Palmaz-Schatz stents and IVUS guidance were used more frequently in the no-restenosis group.
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1 Effect of total stent length on in-stent restenosis rate (p < 0.0001). n = total number of patients at risk per category.
|
|
Angiographic analysis.
The restenosis group had a longer lesion length, a smaller angiographic reference lumen diameter, a smaller final MLD and a higher %DS after the stent procedure (Table 2). There was a significant inverse correlation between the in-stent restenosis rate and the angiographic reference lumen diameter (Fig. 2) or the final MLD (Fig. 3).
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2 Effect of angiographic reference lumen diameter on in-stent restenosis rate (p < 0.0001). n = total number of patients at risk per category.
|
|
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3 Effect of final MLD on in-stent restenosis rate (p < 0.0001). n = total number of patients at risk per catetory.
|
|
IVUS analysis.
The restenosis group had a smaller final stent lumen CSA that occurred in smaller arteries with a smaller proximal or distal reference lumen CSA (Table 2). Figure 4 demonstrates the inverse correlation between stent lumen CSA and in-stent restenosis rate.
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4 Effect of stent lumen CSA on in-stent restenosis rate (p < 0.001). n = total number of patients at risk per category.
|
|
Comparison between IVUS and no-IVUS guidance.
To achieve an optimal result, additional inflations were performed in 420 (34%) of 1,248 lesions with IVUS guidance, and additional stents were implanted in 241 lesions (19%). The lesions with IVUS guidance had a significantly larger final MLD (3.2 ± 0.6 vs. 3.0 ± 0.5 mm, p < 0.0001) and a smaller final %DS (–0.3 ± 13.2% vs. 4.3 ± 12.0%, p < 0.0001), as well as a larger acute gain (2.2 ± 0.7 vs. 2.0 ± 0.6 mm, p < 0.0001), as compared with lesions without IVUS guidance. In addition, the lesions with IVUS guidance had a significantly lower in-stent restenosis rate (24% vs. 29%, p = 0.03).
Multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Eleven clinical variables (age, male gender, hypercholesterolemia, active smoking, diabetes, hypertension, previous myocardial infarction, previous bypass surgery, previous coronary angioplasty, unstable angina and indication for stenting), five procedural variables (IVUS guidance, Palmaz-Schatz stent, single stent, number of stents per lesion, and total stent length), and five angiographic variables (lesion type, lesion length, reference lumen diameter, pre MLD and final MLD) were assessed by univariate logistic regression analysis to determine their correlation with angiographic restenosis. As shown in Table 3, there were 13 univariate predictors of restenosis that were entered into a multivariate logistic regression model for the binomial variable of angiographic restenosis. In-stent restenosis was predicted independently by six variables (Table 3, right). Of these variables, a longer total stent length, previous bypass surgery, patient age and diabetes were variables that increased the risk of restenosis. A larger angiographic reference lumen diameter and a larger final MLD were variables that decreased the risk of restenosis. The best predictors of restenosis were total stent length and angiographic reference lumen diameter. The OR indicates that the predicted risk of restenosis increases 26% for every 10-mm increase in total stent length, and restenosis risk decreases 53% for ever 1-mm increase in reference lumen diameter. The use of IVUS guidance did not reach statistical significance in the multivariate model.
To assess the predictors of in-stent restenosis in lesions where IVUS measurements were obtained, stent lumen CSA by IVUS was entered into the multivariate model. As shown in Table 4, IVUS stent lumen CSA and total stent length were the best predictors of in-stent restenosis in the patients in whom IVUS was performed. The OR indicates that the predicted risk of restenosis decreases 19% for ever 1-mm2 increase in stent lumen CSA. When IVUS measurements were entered into the multivariate model, final MLD by angiography was no longer an independent predictor of restenosis.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 4 Predictors of In-stent Restenosis in Lesions With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance by Multivariate Logistic Regression Analsyis (n = 1,054)
|
|
Because the chance of restenosis of different stents within the same patient may not be independent, a separate logistic regression model was performed using the patient as the unit of analysis. In this model the independent predictors were the same as those in the per lesion analysis: total stent length (OR 1.34/10 mm), final MLD (OR 0.54/1 mm), diabetes (OR 1.33), reference diameter (OR 0.61/1 mm), previous bypass surgery (OR 1.32) and age (OR 1.17/10 years).
|
Discussion
|
|---|
Comparison with other studies.
Klugherz et al. (15) reported that predictors of clinical events 3 years after Palmaz-Schatz stenting included diabetes, higher angina score at follow-up, smaller stent deployment balloon size and greater number of stents implanted. Haude et al. (16) and Ellis et al. (17) reported that multiple stents were an important predictor of angiographic restenosis. Carrozza et al. (18) reported that diabetes, small postprocedure lumen diameter and stenting of the left anterior descending coronary artery were associated with higher rates of restenosis by multivariable logistic regression analysis. The numbers of patients in these studies (50 to 227 patients) were smaller and the patients were more selected as compared with the patients in our study. Recently, Kastrati et al. (19) reported that the strong predictors of in-stent restenosis after Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation in 1,399 lesions were diabetes, multiple stents and smaller final MLD; however, they did not analyze IVUS measurements or total stent length.
Length of stents.
A frequent finding in these previous studies is that in-stent restenosis is more common with multiple stents (16,17). Because we used a variety of stents with different lengths, we analyzed total stent length as well as the number of stents per lesion. By univariate logistic regression analysis, both total stent length and the number of stents per lesion were significant variables. By multiple logistic regression analysis, total stent length was the strongest predictor of restenosis, but the number of stents per lesion or lesion length was not an independent predictor. These results suggest that achieving an optimal result with a minimal total stent length during the procedure may reduce in-stent restenosis.
Role of angiography and IVUS.
Several studies have demonstrated that the incidence of restenosis is decreased when a larger final lumen is achieved for balloon angioplasty, directed atherectomy or stent insertion (10,17,18,20). This prospective analysis extends these observations. Both larger final MLD and larger reference lumen diameter are inversely correlated with restenosis. This combination is understandable because it is easier to obtain a larger stented lumen area in bigger vessels. In arteries with a reference lumen diameter 3.5 mm, the incidence of angiographic restenosis was only 12% (Fig. 2). A persistent problem is how to optimize the results for smaller arteries (17,21,22) and diffuse disease.
Although angiographic guidance has been the traditional method to assess stent deployment, we have reported that 40% of stents with an acceptable angiographic result still required additional dilation with larger balloon to achieve an optimal result by IVUS (13). IVUS provided critical information regarding the adequacy of stent deployment and reference vessel dimensions. This information was used for determining balloon size and whether to use a stent and for maximizing stent expansion. The lesions with IVUS guidance had a larger final MLD and a lower final %DS than the lesions without IVUS guidance. These results indicate that IVUS guidance may be useful for optimizing stent implantation. In addition, the restenosis rate in the lesions where IVUS guidance was used was significantly lower than in the lesions without IVUS guidance. Because this study was not a randomized comparison between angiography and IVUS guidance of coronary stenting, no definitive conclusions can be made from this analysis. Although the binominal variable of IVUS guidance was not an independent predictor of restenosis by multivariate logistic regression analysis, this does not necessarily imply that IVUS guidance does not help decrease restenosis. Because IVUS guidance was associated with a larger final MLD, these two variables parallel each other, and therefore IVUS guidance may not appear in the model as an independent predictor of restenosis. In lesions with IVUS guidance, stent lumen CSA by IVUS was a better predictor of restenosis than angiographic measurements. If the lumen CSA was 12 mm2, the angiographic restenosis rate was only 7% (Fig. 4). Our interpretation is that IVUS guidance is helpful in achieving an optimal result, which in turn may reduce in-stent restenosis.
Study limitations.
Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 70% of the lesions studied during this period. Comparing the two groups with and without follow-up angiography, the group of patients without follow-up angiography were slightly older (59 ± 10 vs. 58 ± 10 years, p < 0.01) than the group with follow-up angiography. However, between the two groups, there were no differences in total stent length, angiographic reference lumen diameter, final MLD and IVUS stent lumen CSA, which were major independent predictors of in-stent restenosis. This suggests that the study group does not represent a biased population.
Although this was an unselected case analysis, there was no randomized protocol for the use of different stents or IVUS guidance. In the multivariate model, r2 = 0.1, which means that only 10% of the variance for restenosis is predicted by these clinical or quantitative variables. The majority of restenosis is not accounted for in this analysis (or by other investigators’ studies). One alternative explanation may be that there are biologic predictors that are not measurable at the present time (23). Despite these limitations, this study is based on one of the largest data bases available of coronary stents with angiographic follow-up. Therefore, these observations may be useful guidelines as predictors of in-stent restenosis, because it is unlikely that many of these individual variables will be studied in prospective, randomized trials.
Conclusions.
This study has identified several factors that predispose to in-stent restenosis: 1) total stent length; 2) angiographic reference lumen diameter; 3) angiographic final MLD; 4) previous bypass surgery; and 6) diabetes. In addition, when IVUS guidance was used, the most important inverse predictor of restenosis was stent lumen CSA. Achieving an optimal stent lumen CSA with the use of IVUS guidance, with a minimal total stent length, may reduce in-stent restenosis.
|
Footnotes
|
|---|
This study was supported in part by Grant R01-HL45077, Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
|
References
|
|---|
1. BENESTENT Study GroupSerruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kimeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-sent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:489–495[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Stent Restenosis Study InvestigatorsFischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:496–501[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. BENESTENT Study GroupMacaya C, Serruys PW, Ruygrok P, et al. Continue benefit of coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty: one-year clinical follow-up of BENESTENT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27:255–261[Abstract]
4. Kimura T, Nosaka H, Yokoi H, Iwabuchi M, Nobuyoshi M. Serial angiographic follow-up after Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation: comparison with conventional balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;21:1557–1563[Abstract]
5. Gordon PC, Gibson CM, Cohen DJ, Carrozza JP, Kuntz RE, Baim DS. Mechanisms of restenosis and redilation within coronary stents—quantitative angiographic assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;21:1166–1174[Abstract]
6. Hoffmann R, Mintz GS, Dussaillant GR, et al. Patterns and mechanisms of in-stent restenosis: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 1996;94:1247–1254[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Reimers B, Moussa I, Akiyama T, et al. Long-term clinical follow-up after successful repeat percutaneous intervention for stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:186–192[Abstract]
8. Savage MP, Fischman DL, Schatz RA, et al. Palmaz-Schatz Stent Study Group. Long-term angiographic and clinical outcome after implantation of a balloon-expandable stent in the native coronary circulation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994;24:1207–1212[Abstract]
9. Laham RJ, Carrozza JP, Berger C, Cohen DJ, Kuntz RE, Baim DS. Long-term (4- to 6-year) outcome of Palmaz-Schatz stenting: paucity of late clinical stent-related problems. [see comments]J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:820–826[Abstract]
10. Kuntz RE, Gibson CM, Nobuyoshi M, Baim DS. Generalized model of restenosis after conventional balloon angioplasty, stenting and directional atherectomy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;21:15–25[Abstract]
11. Nakamura S, Colombo A, Gaglione A, et al. Intracoronary ultrasound observations during stent implantation. Circulation. 1994;89:2026–2034[Free Full Text]
12. Tobis JM, Mallery J, Mahon D, et al. Intravascular ultrasound imaging of human coronary arteries in vivo: analysis of tissue characterizations with comparison to in vitro histological specimens. Circulation. 1991;83:913–926[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Colombo A, Hall P, Nakamura S, et al. Intracoronary stenting without anticoagulation accomplished with intravascular ultrasound guidance. Circulation. 1995;91:1676–1688[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Goldberg SL, Colombo A, Nakamura S, Almagor Y, Maiello L, Tobis JM. Benefit of intracoronary ultrasound in the deployment of Palmaz-Schatz stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994;24:996–1003[Abstract]
15. Klugherz BD, DeAngelo DL, Kim BK, Herrmann HC, Hirshfeld JW, Kolansky DM. Three-year clinical follow-up after Palmaz-Schatz stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27:1185–1191[Abstract]
16. Haude M, Erbel R, Straub U, Dietz U, Meyer J. Short and long term results after intracoronary stenting in human coronary arteries: monocentre experience with the balloon-expandable Palmaz-Schatz stent. Br Heart J. 1991;66:337–345[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Ellis SG, Savage M, Fischman D, et al. Restenosis after placement of Palmaz-Schatz stents in native coronary arteries: initial results of a multicenter experience. Circulation. 1992;86:1836–1844[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Carrozza J, Kuntz R, Schatz R, et al. Inter-series differences in the restenosis rate of Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent placement: differences in demographics and post-procedure lumen diameter. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1994;31:173–178[Medline]
19. Kastrati A, Schomig A, Elezi S, et al. Predictive factors of restenosis after coronary stent placement. J Am Coll Cardio. 1997;30:1428–1436[Abstract]
20. Kuntz R, Safian R, Carrozza J, Fischman R, Mansour M, Baim D. The importance of acute luminal diameter in determining restenosis after coronary atherectomy or stenting. Circulation. 1992;86:1827–1835[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Dussaillant GR, Mintz GS, Pichard AD, et al. Small stent size and intimal hyperplasia contribute to restenosis: a volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26:720–724[Abstract]
22. Gianturco-Roubin Intracoronary Stent Investigator GroupSutton JM, Ellis SG, Roubin GS, et al. Major clinical events after coronary stenting: the multicenter registry of acute and elective Gianturco-Roubin stent placement. Circulation. 1994;89:1126–1137[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Amant C, Bauters C, Bodart JC, et al. D allele of the angiotensin I–converting enzyme is a major risk factor for restenosis after coronary stenting. Circulation. 1997;96:56–60[Abstract/Free Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
X. Liu, H. Doi, A. Maehara, G. S. Mintz, J. de Ribamar Costa Jr, K. Sano, G. Weisz, G. D. Dangas, A. J. Lansky, E. M. Kreps, et al.
A Volumetric Intravascular Ultrasound Comparison of Early Drug-Eluting Stent Thrombosis Versus Restenosis
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv.,
May 1, 2009;
2(5):
428 - 434.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Romagnoli, G. M. Sangiorgi, J. Cosgrave, E. Guillet, and A. Colombo
Drug-eluting stenting the case for post-dilation.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv.,
February 1, 2008;
1(1):
22 - 31.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. O. Jensen, P. Thayssen, L. Thuesen, H. S. Hansen, J. F. Lassen, H. Kelbaek, A. Junker, K. N. Hansen, H. E. Boetker, L. R. Krusell, et al.
Influence of a Pressure Gradient Distal to Implanted Bare-Metal Stent on In-Stent Restenosis After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Circulation,
December 11, 2007;
116(24):
2802 - 2808.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. G. Brown
A Direct Comparison of Intravascular Ultrasound and Quantitative Coronary Arteriography: Implications for Measures of Atherosclerosis as Clinical Surrogates
Circulation,
April 10, 2007;
115(14):
1824 - 1826.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Ben-Gal, Y. Moshkovitz, N. Nesher, G. Uretzky, R. Braunstein, A. Hendler, E. Zivi, I. Herz, and R. Mohr
Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus
Ann. Thorac. Surg.,
November 1, 2006;
82(5):
1692 - 1697.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. J. Clark, S. Lessio, M. O'Donoghue, C. Tsalamandris, R. Schainfeld, and K. Rosenfield
Mechanisms and Predictors of Carotid Artery Stent Restenosis: A Serial Intravascular Ultrasound Study
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
June 20, 2006;
47(12):
2390 - 2396.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. R. Holmes Jr, P. Teirstein, L. Satler, M. Sketch, J. O'Malley, J. J. Popma, R. E. Kuntz, P. J. Fitzgerald, H. Wang, E. Caramanica, et al.
Sirolimus-Eluting Stents vs Vascular Brachytherapy for In-Stent Restenosis Within Bare-Metal Stents: The SISR Randomized Trial
JAMA,
March 15, 2006;
295(11):
1264 - 1273.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A K Mitra and D K Agrawal
In stent restenosis: bane of the stent era.
J. Clin. Pathol.,
March 1, 2006;
59(3):
232 - 239.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. W. Stone, S. G. Ellis, L. Cannon, J. T. Mann, J. D. Greenberg, D. Spriggs, C. D. O'Shaughnessy, S. DeMaio, P. Hall, J. J. Popma, et al.
Comparison of a Polymer-Based Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent With a Bare Metal Stent in Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial
JAMA,
September 14, 2005;
294(10):
1215 - 1223.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. Wijns, S. Verheye, G. Manoharan, G. S. Werner, E. Grube, B. De Bruyne, J. Koolen, C. W. Hamm, A. Medina, J. W. Bech, et al.
Angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and fractional flow reserve evaluation of direct stenting vs. conventional stenting using BeStent2 in a multicentre randomized trial
Eur. Heart J.,
September 2, 2005;
26(18):
1852 - 1859.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. B. Hermiller, A. Raizner, L. Cannon, P. A. Gurbel, M. A. Kutcher, S. C. Wong, M. E. Russell, S. G. Ellis, R. Mehran, G. W. Stone, et al.
Outcomes with the polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent in patients with diabetes mellitus: The TAXUS-IV trial
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
April 19, 2005;
45(8):
1172 - 1179.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Dangas, S. G. Ellis, R. Shlofmitz, S. Katz, D. Fish, S. Martin, R. Mehran, M. E. Russell, G. W. Stone, and TAXUS-IV Investigators
Outcomes of paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in patients with stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
April 19, 2005;
45(8):
1186 - 1192.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Sahara, H. Kirigaya, Y. Oikawa, J. Yajima, K. Nagashima, H. Hara, K. Ogasawara, and T. Aizawa
Soft plaque detected on intravascular ultrasound is the strongest predictor of in-stent restenosis: an intravascular ultrasound study
Eur. Heart J.,
November 2, 2004;
25(22):
2026 - 2033.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Hong, G. S. Chrysant, P. K. Woodard, and K. T. Bae
Coronary Artery Stent Patency Assessed with In-Stent Contrast Enhancement Measured at Multi-Detector Row CT Angiography: Initial Experience
Radiology,
October 1, 2004;
233(1):
286 - 291.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. W. Stone, S. G. Ellis, D. A. Cox, J. Hermiller, C. O'Shaughnessy, J. T. Mann, M. Turco, R. Caputo, P. Bergin, J. Greenberg, et al.
One-Year Clinical Results With the Slow-Release, Polymer-Based, Paclitaxel-Eluting TAXUS Stent: The TAXUS-IV Trial
Circulation,
April 27, 2004;
109(16):
1942 - 1947.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. W. Stone, S. G. Ellis, D. A. Cox, J. Hermiller, C. O'Shaughnessy, J. T. Mann, M. Turco, R. Caputo, P. Bergin, J. Greenberg, et al.
A Polymer-Based, Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease
N. Engl. J. Med.,
January 15, 2004;
350(3):
221 - 231.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V Bhatia, R Bhatia, and M Dhindsa
Drug-eluting stents: new era and new concerns
Postgrad. Med. J.,
January 1, 2004;
80(939):
13 - 18.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Sahara, H. Kirigaya, Y. Oikawa, J. Yajima, K. Ogasawara, H. Satoh, K. Nagashima, H. Hara, Y. Nakatsu, and T. Aizawa
Arterial remodeling patterns before intervention predict diffuse in-stent restenosis: An intravascular ultrasound study
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
November 19, 2003;
42(10):
1731 - 1738.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Spanos, G. Stankovic, J. Tobis, and A. Colombo
The challenge of in-stent restenosis: insights from intravascular ultrasound
Eur. Heart J.,
January 2, 2003;
24(2):
138 - 150.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Colombo, G. Stankovic, and J. W. Moses
Selection of coronary stents
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
September 18, 2002;
40(6):
1021 - 1033.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Briguori, C. Sarais, P. Pagnotta, F. Liistro, M. Montorfano, A. Chieffo, F. Sgura, N. Corvaja, R. Albiero, G. Stankovic, et al.
In-stent restenosis in small coronary arteries: Impact of strut thickness
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
August 7, 2002;
40(3):
403 - 409.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. H.J. Pijls, V. Klauss, U. Siebert, E. Powers, K. Takazawa, W. F. Fearon, J. Escaned, Y. Tsurumi, T. Akasaka, H. Samady, et al.
Coronary Pressure Measurement After Stenting Predicts Adverse Events at Follow-Up: A Multicenter Registry
Circulation,
June 25, 2002;
105(25):
2950 - 2954.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Yoshitomi, S. Kojima, M. Yano, Y. Matsumoto, T. Sugi, M. Saotome, K.-e Tanaka, M. Endo, and M. Kuramochi
Peristent Tissue Proliferation of Multilink Stents Is Dependent on Preprocedural Plaque Area: A Serial Intravascular Ultrasound Analysis
Angiology,
May 1, 2002;
53(3):
303 - 311.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Briguori, J. Tobis, T. Nishida, M. Vaghetti, R. Albiero, C. Di Mario, and A. Colombo
Discrepancy between angiography and intravascular ultrasound when analysing small coronary arteries
Eur. Heart J.,
February 1, 2002;
23(3):
247 - 254.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Johansson, H. Olsson, and B. Wennerblom
Angiography-Guided Routine Coronary Stent Implantation Results in Suboptimal Dilatation
Angiology,
January 1, 2002;
53(1):
69 - 75.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Colombo, J. De Gregorio, I. Moussa, Y. Kobayashi, E. Karvouni, C. Di Mario, R. Albiero, L. Finci, and J. Moses
Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with provisional spot stenting for treatment of long coronary lesions
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
November 1, 2001;
38(5):
1427 - 1433.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Wohrle, E Al-Khayer, U Grotzinger, C Schindler, M Kochs, V Hombach, and M Hoher
Comparison of the heparin coated vs the uncoated Jostent(R)--no influence on restenosis or clinical outcome
Eur. Heart J.,
October 1, 2001;
22(19):
1808 - 1816.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S.-J. Park, M.-K. Hong, C. W. Lee, J.-J. Kim, J.-K. Song, D.-H. Kang, S.-W. Park, and G. S. Mintz
Elective stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: Effect of debulking before stenting and intravascular ultrasound guidance
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
October 1, 2001;
38(4):
1054 - 1060.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Albertal, G Van Langenhove, E Regar, I P Kay, D Foley, G Sianos, K Kozuma, T Beijsterveldt, S G Carlier, J A Belardi, et al.
Uncomplicated moderate coronary artery dissections after balloon angioplasty: good outcome without stenting
Heart,
August 1, 2001;
86(2):
193 - 198.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Moustapha, A. R. Assali, S. Sdringola, W. K. Vaughn, R. D. Fish, O. Rosales, G. Schroth, Z. Krajcer, R. W. Smalling, and H. V. Anderson
Percutaneous and surgical interventions for in-stent restenosis: long-term outcomes and effect of diabetes mellitus
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
June 1, 2001;
37(7):
1877 - 1882.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L. Goldberg, A. Loussararian, J. De Gregorio, C. Di Mario, R. Albiero, and A. Colombo
Predictors of diffuse and aggressive intra-stent restenosis
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
March 15, 2001;
37(4):
1019 - 1025.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U E Heidland, M P Heintzen, C J Michel, and B E Strauer
Risk factors for the development of restenosis following stent implantation of venous bypass grafts
Heart,
March 1, 2001;
85(3):
312 - 317.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. B. Leon, P. S. Teirstein, J. W. Moses, P. Tripuraneni, A. J. Lansky, S. Jani, S. C. Wong, D. Fish, S. Ellis, D. R. Holmes, et al.
Localized Intracoronary Gamma-Radiation Therapy to Inhibit the Recurrence of Restenosis after Stenting
N. Engl. J. Med.,
January 25, 2001;
344(4):
250 - 256.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Di Mario, J. W. Moses, T. J. Anderson, R. Bonan, T. Muramatsu, A. C. Jain, J. Suarez de Lezo, S. Y. Cho, M. Kern, I. T. Meredith, et al.
Randomized Comparison of Elective Stent Implantation and Coronary Balloon Angioplasty Guided by Online Quantitative Angiography and Intracoronary Doppler
Circulation,
December 12, 2000;
102(24):
2938 - 2944.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C Di Mario, F Marsico, M Adamian, E Karvouni, R Albiero, and A Colombo
New recipes for in-stent restenosis: cut, grate, roast, or sandwich the neointima?
Heart,
November 1, 2000;
84(5):
471 - 475.
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Hibi, A. Takagi, X. Zhang, T.-J. Teo, H. N. Bonneau, P. G. Yock, and P. J. Fitzgerald
Feasibility of a Novel Blood Noise Reduction Algorithm to Enhance Reproducibility of Ultra-High-Frequency Intravascular Ultrasound Images
Circulation,
October 3, 2000;
102(14):
1657 - 1663.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Koster, J. Kahler, W. Terres, J. Reimers, S. Baldus, D. Hartig, J.u. Berger, T. Meinertz, and C. W. Hamm
Six-month clinical and angiographic outcome after successful excimer laser angioplasty for in-stent restenosis
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
July 1, 2000;
36(1):
69 - 74.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Di Mario and E. Karvouni
The bigger, the better: true also for in-stent restenosis?
Eur. Heart J.,
May 1, 2000;
21(9):
710 - 711.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Yamashita, T. Nishida, M. G. Adamian, C. Briguori, M. Vaghetti, N. Corvaja, R. Albiero, L. Finci, C. Di Mario, J. M. Tobis, et al.
Bifurcation lesions: two stents versus one stent--immediate and follow-up results
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
April 1, 2000;
35(5):
1145 - 1151.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Kornowski, B. Bhargava, D. M. S. Fuchs, A. J. Lansky, L. F. Satler, A. D. Pichard, M. K. Hong, K. M. Kent, R. Mehran, G. W. Stone, et al.
Procedural results and late clinical outcomes after percutaneous interventions using long (>=25 mm) versus short (<20 mm) stents
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
March 1, 2000;
35(3):
612 - 618.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-P. Bassand
Intravascular ultrasound guided PTCA: a way to escape stent mania?
Eur. Heart J.,
January 2, 2000;
21(2):
92 - 94.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. de Feyter, P. Kay, C. Disco, and P. W. Serruys
Reference Chart Derived From Post-Stent-Implantation Intravascular Ultrasound Predictors of 6-Month Expected Restenosis on Quantitative Coronary Angiography
Circulation,
October 26, 1999;
100(17):
1777 - 1783.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
Top
Abstract
Methods