This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Albiero, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Albiero, R.

CLINICAL RESEARCH: INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY

Cutting balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

Results of the restenosis cutting balloon evaluation trial (RESCUT)

Remo Albiero, MD^*,*, Sigmund Silber, MD, Carlo Di Mario, MD, Carmelo Cernigliaro, MD, Salvatore Battaglia, MD^||, Bernhard Reimers, MD^¶, Arian Frasheri, MD^#, Volker Klauss, MD^**, Joseph M. Auge, MD, Paolo Rubartelli, MD, Marie-Claude Morice, MD, Alberto Cremonesi, MD^||||, Joachim Schofer, MD^¶¶, Alessandro Bortone, MD^##, Antonio Colombo, MD^* RESCUT Investigators

^* Columbus Hospital, Milan, Italy
Müller Hospital, Munich, Germany
San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
Ospedale Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy
^|| Clinica Montevergine, Mercogliano (AV), Italy
^¶ Ospedale Civile, Mirano, Italy
^# Casa di Cura Villa Maria Eleonora, Palermo, Italy
^** Klinikum Innenstadt Abteilung Cardiologie, Munich, Germany
Hospital Santa Creu I Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
Ospedale San Martino, Genova, Italy
Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Massy, France
^|||| Casa di Cura Villa Maria Cecilia, Cotignola (RA), Italy
^¶¶ Kardiologische Klinik Andreas-Grünzig-Haus, Hamburg, Germany
^## Policlinico, Bari, Italy

Manuscript received July 23, 2003; revised manuscript received September 5, 2003, accepted September 9, 2003.

^* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Remo Albiero, Laboratorio di Emodinamica, Clinica San Rocco di Franciacorta; Via dei Sabbioni 24, 25050 Ome (BS), Italy.
remo.albiero{at}email.it

	Abstract

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

 
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this trial was to compare cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) with conventional balloon angioplasty (i.e., percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty [PTCA]) for the treatment of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR).

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies suggest CBA might be superior to conventional PTCA in the treatment of ISR.

METHODS: The Restenosis Cutting Balloon Evaluation Trial (RESCUT) is a multicenter, randomized, prospective European trial including 428 patients with all types of ISR (e.g., focal, multifocal, diffuse, proliferative).

RESULTS: In both groups, the majority of ISR lesions were shorter than 20 mm. The length of restenotic stents was similar (CBA: 18.6 ± 9.7 mm; PTCA: 18.3 ± 8.7 mm). The number of balloons used to treat ISR was lower in the CBA group: only one balloon was used in 82.3% of CBA cases, compared with 75% of PTCA procedures (p = 0.03). Balloon slippage was less frequent in the CBA group (CBA 6.5%, PTCA 25%; p < 0.01). There was a trend toward a lower need for additional stenting in the CBA group (CBA 3.9%, PTCA 8.0%; p = 0.07). At seven-month angiographic follow-up, the binary restenosis rate was not different between the groups (CBA 29.8%, PTCA 31.4%; p = 0.82), with a similar pattern of recurrent restenosis. Clinical events at seven months were also similar.

CONCLUSIONS: Cutting balloon angioplasty did not reduce recurrent ISR and major adverse cardiac events, as compared with conventional PTCA. However, CBA was associated with some procedural advantages, such as use of fewer balloons, less requirement for additional stenting, and a lower incidence of balloon slippage.

Abbreviations and Acronyms   CABG = coronary artery bypass graft surgery   CBA = cutting balloon angioplasty   CK = creatine kinase   %DS = percent diameter stenosis   ISR = in-stent restenosis   IVUS = intravascular ultrasound   MACE = major adverse cardiac events   MLD = minimum lumen diameter   PTCA = percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty   QCA = quantitative coronary angiography   RESCUT = Restenosis Cutting Balloon Evaluation Trial

	Methods

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

 
Study design and objectives.   The Restenosis Cutting Balloon Evaluation Trial (RESCUT) was a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial performed at 23 centers in Europe (Appendix) to evaluate the immediate and seven-month results of CBA compared with conventional PTCA for the treatment of all types of ISR. The primary end point was angiographic restenosis (50% diameter reduction) of the target lesion, as assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at seven-month follow-up in the two treatment arms. Secondary end points were the occurrence of major adverse clinical events (MACE) at 30 days and seven-month follow-up in the two treatment arms, the need for additional stent implantation in each arm, and the pattern of restenosis recurrence.

Study population.   Patients fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: 1) angina and/or objective evidence of target vessel-related ischemia by a functional study; 2) target lesions located in native coronary arteries with single or multiple (maximum of three) ISR and with an angiographic percent diameter stenosis (%DS) between 51% and 99% by visual assessment; and 3) lesions that could be focal (<10 mm), multifocal, diffuse (>10 mm), or proliferative (extending outside the stent margins), with a total lesion length 25 mm. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: 1) known allergy to the study medication (e.g., heparin, ticlopidine, clopidogrel, aspirin); 2) recent myocardial infarction (<72 h), defined as a serum level 2 x the upper limit of normal of creatine kinase (CK) and elevated MB fraction; 3) concomitant PTCA in another vessel during the same procedure or within 30 days; 4) additional brachytherapy after the randomized mechanical treatment of ISR by CBA or conventional PTCA; 5) the lesion was located in an internal mammary artery, saphenous vein bypass graft, or unprotected left main coronary artery; and 6) ISR was in a bifurcated stent. A status of recurrent intrastent restenosis (e.g., second time, third time, and so on) was not considered an exclusion criterion for entry into the study.

Interventional procedures.   The CBA arm
The cutting balloon device (Boston Scientific Corp.) was a 10- to 15-mm-long cutting balloon selected with the same or 0.25- to 0.5-mm larger diameter than the vessel size. The cutting balloon was positioned at the lesion site (using predilation with a small conventional balloon in case of unsuccessful passage) and inflated to the recommended maximal pressure of 8 to 12 atm.

The PTCA arm
The PTCA procedure was done using noncompliant or semicompliant balloons that matched the size of the final balloon used at the time of stent implantation. The balloon was inflated at high pressure (>10 to 12 atm), with the goal of achieving near 0% residual stenosis.

Both arms
At least three separate, slow balloon inflations were recommended at the lesion site, preferably moving distal to proximal, to fully cover the lesion area to be treated. The occurrence of slippage of the balloon, defined as a forward or backward movement of the balloon of at least 3 mm during its inflation at the lesion site, and dissections outside of the stent after deflation of the balloon were recorded. In case the balloon did not expand, the lesion could be treated with other devices, such as rotational atherectomy (Rotablator, Boston Scientific Corp., Cork, Ireland), directional atherectomy, laser atherectomy, or a different balloon. If the angiographic result was not acceptable with residual stenosis 30%, the implantation of an additional stent was recommended. However, the investigators were free to select the more appropriate device for the lesions in which balloon treatment failed.

Coronary angiography.   Three coronary angiograms were performed in each patient: one before and one immediately after the procedure and one after seven months from the initial procedure. At least two orthogonal projections of the coronary segment scheduled for coronary intervention were filmed before the intervention. The same projections were repeated after the intervention and at follow-up angiography. Each angiogram was preceded by intracoronary injection of nitrates (100 to 200 µg nitroglycerin or 1 to 3 mg isosorbide dinitrate). The angiographic findings of dissection were recorded and analyzed.

Quantitative coronary angiography.   Reference diameter, minimum lumen diameter (MLD), %DS, and lesion length were measured for each lesion from the single view showing the most severe degree of stenosis by the use of a computer-assisted automated edge-detection algorithm (QCA-CMS Version 4.0, MEDIS, Leiden, the Netherlands). Inter- and intra-observer variabilities have been reported to range from 0.07 to 0.10 mm for MLD and 2.7% to 5.1% for %DS, even when using the most precise angiographic systems (16–18). Acute lumen gain was defined as the MLD immediately after the procedure minus the MLD before the procedure. Late lumen loss was defined as the MLD after the procedure minus the MLD at follow-up. The late loss index was defined as the late lumen loss divided by the acute lumen gain. Restenosis was defined as 50% DS inside the stent or within 5 mm from the stent edges, presenting at least eight weeks after the initial stent implantation or after successful treatment of ISR. In addition, ISR was defined as focal (<10 mm in length) or diffuse (10 mm in length).

Concomitant medications.   All patients received 100 to 325 mg aspirin plus 250 mg ticlopidine twice daily, or 75 mg/day clopidogrel before the procedure. Intraprocedural heparin was given as an intravenous bolus of 70 to 100 U/kg after sheath insertion and then repeated as needed to keep the activated clotting time >200 to 250 s. Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were given at the operator's discretion only in selected patients. After the procedure, heparin was stopped and the sheath removed. All patients at discharge received 100 to 325 mg/day aspirin indefinitely plus 250 mg ticlopidine twice daily, or 75 mg/day clopidogrel for 1 week. The further use of ticlopidine/clopidogrel for one month was recommended only in patients who required the implantation of additional stents.

Clinical follow-up.   In-hospital, 30-day, and cumulative 7-month MACE were defined as death, any myocardial infarction, and/or repeat revascularization (coronary artery bypass graft surgery [CABG]/repeat PTCA). A diagnosis of Q-wave myocardial infarction was made when there was documentation of new pathologic Q waves (>0.04 s) on the electrocardiogram in conjunction with elevation of total CK more than twice the normal value, with a concomitant elevation of the CK-MB. A diagnosis of non–Q-wave myocardial infarction was made when an elevation of total CK to greater than twice the upper limit of normal value, with a concomitant elevation of CK-MB, was documented without development of new pathologic Q waves. Twelve-lead electrocardiograms were recorded before and immediately after the procedure and at hospital discharge, as well as during and after episodes of chest pain. Total CK and CK-MB levels were routinely obtained before and after the procedure and repeated after 6 and 12 h.

Statistical analysis.   Based on retrospectively collected data (15), a restenosis rate of approximately 42% could be expected after treatment of intrastent restenosis using a conventional balloon versus 27% using a cutting balloon. Accepting these values, we estimated a sample size of about 420 patients (210 in each arm) to establish a statistically significant difference between the two strategies, with an alpha error of 0.05, a beta error of 0.20, and a two-sided test. A drop-out rate of 20% was also considered. The chi-square test was performed to test for homogeneity of distribution of categorical data, reported as m x n contingency tables; 2 x 2 contingency tables were analyzed according to the Fisher exact test. Analysis of variance was performed for continuous data. Results are expressed as the mean value ± SD. The association between binary restenosis and the potential predictors was assessed via logistic regression methods. Variables with biologic remarkable predictivity (reference vessel diameter before procedure, MLD after procedure, diabetes, unstable angina, previous restenosis of target lesion, time to last stent implantation) and parameters that were statistically significant on univariate analysis (lesion length, number of balloons used, type of lesion) were included in the multivariate analysis. A stepwise selection method according to the maximum likelihood ratio was used to define the predictors of the logistic model. The results were presented as the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval for each variable. A value p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

	Results

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

 
Patient population and baseline lesion characteristics.   A total of 428 patients were randomly assigned to CBA (n = 214 [229 lesions]) or PTCA (n = 214 [237 lesions]). Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics (Table 1) were similar in both arms, except for previous CABG (CBA 12% vs. PTCA 6%; p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in baseline stent and lesion characteristics (Table 2), except for a higher rate of multifocal, diffuse, or proliferative lesions in the PTCA group. The majority of ISR was first ISR (CBA 84.6%, PTCA 81.5%; p = 0.06) and <20 mm in length (CBA 86.7%, PTCA 83.6%; p = 0.44).

Clinical events and angiographic results.   As shown in Table 4, there were no differences between the two arms in clinical events during the hospital stay and at 30-day follow-up since hospital discharge and in cumulative MACE at 7-month follow-up.

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1 Measurements by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Cumulative distribution curves of minimum lumen diameter (MLD). CB = cutting balloon.

	Discussion

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

Theoretical advantages of CBA over conventional PTCA for treatment of ISR.   Previous IVUS studies suggested a difference in the mechanisms of lumen enlargement after CBA and conventional PTCA. Mehran et al. (20) demonstrated by IVUS that the mechanism of conventional PTCA for the treatment of ISR is a combination of additional stent expansion and tissue extrusion out of the stent: of the total lumen enlargement, 56% is attributable to additional stent expansion, whereas 44% is the result of an apparent decrease (displacement) in neointimal tissue. In addition, a significant tissue re-intrusion shortly after catheter-based treatment of ISR has been reported, which results in early lumen loss (21).

Our hypothesis was that CBA could have a potential advantage over conventional PTCA for the treatment of ISR because it could lead to less remaining tissue inside the stent. This hypothesis was based on a previous observational study (19) that demonstrated a greater capacity of CBA to extrude fibrous residual neointimal plaque out of the stent struts, compared with conventional PTCA. The microblades of the cutting balloon are able to surgically incise the restenotic plaques up to the metallic stent cage, and these incisions could facilitate the maximum extrusion of the neointimal plaque, separated into three or four quadrants. This hypothesis was confirmed by a recent IVUS study (14) that showed a larger lumen area acute gain after CBA (2.5 ± 0.8 mm²) than after conventional PTCA (1.8 ± 1.0 mm²), which translated in a lower restenosis rate at 5.4-month follow-up (CBA 24%, PTCA 59%). Cutting balloon angioplasty also has a practical advantage over conventional PTCA for the treatment of ISR: conventional PTCA balloons, especially short balloons, when positioned within restenotic lesions, tend to move forward or backward during inflation into larger segments with lower resistance, because the hyperplastic tissue has a smooth slippery surface; with a cutting balloon, this problem is prevented by the blades, which anchor the balloon to the plaque during balloon inflation, reducing the risk of dissection at the stent margins. This fact could be important when contemplating additional brachytherapy, a setting where there is the need to carefully control the boundaries of the injured segment. In the present trial, the CBA procedure was accompanied by a significantly lower incidence of balloon slippage.

Why did CBA fail to improve the outcome?.   There are some possible explanations for this unexpected outcome. First, there is the relatively lower risk of ISR recurrence in the two cohorts, which mostly had lesions shorter than 20 mm and prevalently focal and multifocal lesions. In fact, the recurrence of restenosis after repeat angioplasty for the treatment of ISR is influenced by its pattern (3–6,8,22), with a better outcome for focal than for diffuse ISR lesions, and a prohibitive recurrence rate for total occlusions (1). It can be also speculated that the operators did not perform an appropriate number of cutting balloon inflations. This hypothesis is supported by the observation of a similar mean number of balloon inflations in the two arms, but given the longer length of the conventional PTCA balloons used, there should have been a higher number inflations with the shorter cutting balloons to cover the same lesion length.

Study limitations.   A limitation of the present study is the lack of data on IVUS assessment of the treated lesions, so as to better understand the differential mechanisms of CBA versus conventional PTCA in ISR. A downside of the cutting balloon is that it is more costly than standard balloons. A cost-benefit analysis was not performed in this trial. Therefore, the issue of whether the increased expense per procedure could be offset by the fewer stents used could not be solved. Only 82% of study groups had seven-month angiographic follow-up. However, as assumed for RESCUT sample size calculation, about 20% of patients are routinely lost to follow-up.

	Conclusions and future directions

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

 
The results of this study indicate that CBA and traditional PTCA are equally effective in preventing the recurrence of ISR. There were no differences in QCA measurements, recurrence of binary restenosis, or clinical event rates at seven-month follow-up between the two treatments. However, CBA was associated with some advantages: the procedure required fewer balloons and was accompanied by a lower incidence of balloon slippage (containment of trauma, especially useful when combining CBA with brachytherapy). In the CBA group, there was also an almost significantly lower need for additional stent implantation.

The question of the long-term superiority of CBA over conventional PTCA for the treatment of ISR will be also addressed by another ongoing randomized multicenter Japanese study—the Restenosis Reduction by Cutting Balloon Evaluation (REDUCE II).

	APPENDIX

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

 
For a list of the Steering Committee, Data and Safety Monitoring Board, Core Laboratories, and Participating Centers of the RESCUT trial, please see the March 17, 2004, issue of JACC at www.cardiosource.com/jacc.html .

	Footnotes

 
This study was supported by Boston Scientific Europe Corporation, Paris, France.

	References

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion Conclusions and future... APPENDIX References

 

1. Mintz GS, Hoffmann R, Mehran R, et al. In-stent restenosis: the Washington Hospital Center experience. Am J Cardiol. 1998;81:7[CrossRef][Medline]
2. U.S. Palmaz-Schatz Stent InvestigatorsBaim DS, Levine MJ, Leon MB, Levine S, Ellis SG, Schatz RA. Management of restenosis within the Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent (the U.S. multicenter experience). Am J Cardiol. 1993;71:364–366[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Bauters C, Banos JL, Van Belle E, McFadden EP, Lablanche JM, Bertrand ME. Six-month angiographic outcome after successful repeat percutaneous intervention for in-stent restenosis. Circulation. 1998;97:318–321[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. 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]
5. Bossi I, Klersy C, Black AJ, et al. In-stent restenosis: long-term outcome and predictors of subsequent target lesion revascularization after repeat balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1569–1576[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Mehran R, Dangas G, Abizaid AS, et al. Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis: classification and implications for long-term outcome. Circulation. 1999;100:1872–1878[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Kini A, Marmur JD, Dangas G, Choudhary S, Sharma SK. Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis and implications on subsequent revascularization. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv. 2000;49:23–29[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Eltchaninoff H, Koning R, Tron C, Gupta V, Cribier A. Balloon angioplasty for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: immediate results and 6-month angiographic recurrent restenosis rate. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:980–984[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. 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]
10. Dauerman HL, Baim DS, Cutlip DE, et al. Mechanical debulking versus balloon angioplasty for the treatment of diffuse in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82:277–284[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Mehran R, Mintz GS, Satler LF, et al. Treatment of in-stent restenosis with excimer laser coronary angioplasty: mechanisms and results compared with PTCA alone. Circulation. 1997;96:2183–2189[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. vom Dahl J, Dietz U, Haager PK, et al. Rotational atherectomy does not reduce recurrent in-stent restenosis: results of the Angioplasty versus Rotational atherectomy for Treatment of diffuse In-Stent restenosis Trial (ARTIST). Circulation. 2002;105:583–588[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Barath P, Fishbein MC, Vari S, Forrester JS. Cutting balloon: a novel approach to percutaneous angioplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1991;68:1249–1252[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Muramatsu T, Tsukahara R, Ho M, et al. Efficacy of cutting balloon angioplasty for in-stent restenosis: an intravascular ultrasound evaluation. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001;13:439–444[Medline]
15. Adamian M, Colombo A, Briguori C, et al. Cutting balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: a matched comparison with rotational atherectomy, additional stent implantation and balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:672–679[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Reiber J. Why and how should QCA systems be validated? Serruys P, Foley D, de Feyter P. Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Clinical Practice. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1994.
17. Reiber JH, Serruys PW, Kooijman CJ, et al. Assessment of short-, medium-, and long-term variations in arterial dimensions from computer-assisted quantitation of coronary cineangiograms. Circulation. 1985;71:280–288[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Herrington DM, Siebes M, Sokol DK, Siu CO, Walford GD. Variability in measures of coronary lumen dimensions using quantitative coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1068–1074[Abstract]
19. Albiero R, Nishida T, Karvouni E, et al. Cutting balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv. 2000;50:452–459[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Mehran R, Mintz GS, Popma JJ, et al. Mechanisms and results of balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol. 1996;78:618–622[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Shiran A, Mintz GS, Waksman R, et al. Early lumen loss after treatment of in-stent restenosis: an intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 1998;98:200–203[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Jolly N, Ellis SG, Franco I, et al. Coronary artery stent restenosis responds favorably to repeat interventions. Am J Cardiol. 1999;83:1565–1568[CrossRef][Medline]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Kariya, N. Tanigawa, H. Kojima, A. Komemushi, Y. Shomura, T. Shiraishi, T. Kawanaka, and S. Sawada Primary Patency with Cutting and Conventional Balloon Angioplasty for Different Types of Hemodialysis Access Stenosis Radiology, May 1, 2007; 243(2): 578 - 587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Dibra, A. Kastrati, F. Alfonso, M. Seyfarth, M.-J. Perez-Vizcayno, J. Mehilli, and A. Schomig Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With Bare-Metal In-Stent Restenosis: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 6, 2007; 49(5): 616 - 623. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Alfonso, M.-J. Perez-Vizcayno, R. Hernandez, A. Bethencourt, V. Marti, J. R. Lopez-Minguez, J. Angel, R. Mantilla, C. Moris, A. Cequier, et al. A Randomized Comparison of Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With Balloon Angioplasty in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis: Results of the Restenosis Intrastent: Balloon Angioplasty Versus Elective Sirolimus-Eluting Stenting (RIBS-II) Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 6, 2006; 47(11): 2152 - 2160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. L. Dauerman Treatment of Stent Restenosis: Moving Beyond Momentum J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 6, 2006; 47(11): 2161 - 2163. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A N Seale, P E F Daubeney, A G Magee, and M L Rigby Pulmonary vein stenosis: initial experience with cutting balloon angioplasty Heart, June 1, 2006; 92(6): 815 - 820. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Mukherjee and D. J. Moliterno Brachytherapy for In-Stent Restenosis: A Distant Second Choice to Drug-Eluting Stent Placement JAMA, March 15, 2006; 295(11): 1307 - 1309. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Zohlnhofer, J. Hausleiter, A. Kastrati, J. Mehilli, C. Goos, H. Schuhlen, J. Pache, G. Pogatsa-Murray, U. Heemann, J. Dirschinger, et al. A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial on Restenosis Prevention by the Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Imatinib J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 6, 2005; 46(11): 1999 - 2003. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Alfonso, J. M. Auge, J. Zueco, A. Bethencourt, J. R. Lopez-Minguez, J. M. Hernandez, J. A. Bullones, I. Calvo, E. Esplugas, M. J. Perez-Vizcayno, et al. Long-Term Results (Three to Five Years) of the Restenosis Intrastent: Balloon Angioplasty Versus Elective Stenting (RIBS) Randomized Study J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 6, 2005; 46(5): 756 - 760. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M R Thomas Brachytherapy: here today, gone tomorrow? Heart, June 1, 2005; 91(suppl_3): iii32 - iii34. [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Alfonso Drug-Eluting Stents and In-Stent Restenosis JAMA, April 20, 2005; 293(15): 1855 - 1855. [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. W. O'Neill, S. R. Dixon, and C. L. Grines The year in interventional cardiology J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 5, 2005; 45(7): 1117 - 1134. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Authors/Task Force Members, S. Silber, P. Albertsson, F. F. Aviles, P. G. Camici, A. Colombo, C. Hamm, E. Jorgensen, J. Marco, J.-E. Nordrehaug, et al. Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology Eur. Heart J., April 2, 2005; 26(8): 804 - 847. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kastrati, J. Mehilli, N. von Beckerath, A. Dibra, J. Hausleiter, J. Pache, H. Schuhlen, C. Schmitt, J. Dirschinger, A. Schomig, et al. Sirolimus-Eluting Stent or Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent vs Balloon Angioplasty for Prevention of Recurrences in Patients With Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA, January 12, 2005; 293(2): 165 - 171. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Alfonso Should we use the cutting balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 21, 2004; 44(12): 2416 - 2416. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Albiero, S. Silber, C. Di Mario, and A. Colombo Reply J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 21, 2004; 44(12): 2417 - 2417. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Albiero, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Albiero, R.