Copyright © 2000 by the European Society of Cardiology.
Predictors of event-free survival after repeat intracoronary procedure for in-stent restenosis. Study with angiographic and intravascular ultrasound imaging
University Hospital Jean-Minjoz, Besançon, France
revised August 17, 1999; accepted August 18, 1999
Abstract
Aims Lumen enlargement during repeat percutaneous coronary intervention for in-stent restenosis has been shown to be the result of both stent over-expansion and decrease in neointimal tissue. How these two different mechanisms of action may influence outcome and target lesion revascularization after repeat intervention for in-stent restenosis is unclear.
Methods Intravascular ultrasound guided repeat intervention for in-stent restenosis was carried out either with balloon angioplasty, or with a combination of rotational atherectomy plus balloon angioplasty. Clinical follow-up at 1 year, including death, myocardial infarction, or need for revascularization, was obtained.
Results Seventy patients were included in this study; 40 were treated by balloon alone, and 30 by combination of rotational atherectomy plus balloon. Event-free survival probability was 76±5%. The mechanism of lumen enlargement, be it stent over-expansion or tissue removal, had no influence on long-term clinical evolution. The only independent predictor was the minimal lumen cross-sectional area at the end of the procedure, the larger the lumen cross-sectional area, the higher the event-free probability. The cut-off point of the lumen cross-sectional area was set at 4·7mm2by discriminant analysis. Event-free survival was 69±15% in patients with <4·7mm2lumen cross-sectional area and 91±8% in patients with >4·7mm2lumen cross-sectional area (P=0·008).
Conclusions This study showed that the only independent predictor of late clinical outcome after percutaneous re-intervention for in-stent restenosis was final lumen size, no matter which means were used to achieve it.
Key Words: In-stent restenosis, intravascular ultrasound, angioplasty, rotational atherectomy
f1 Correspondence: François Schiele, MD, FESC, Service de Cardiologie, Pôle Coeur-Poumons, Hôpital Universitaire Jean-Minjoz, Boulevard Fleming, 25030 Besançon Cedex, France
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
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] |
||||
![]() |
J. vom Dahl, U. Dietz, P. K. Haager, S. Silber, L. Niccoli, H. J. Buettner, F. Schiele, M. Thomas, P. Commeau, D. R. Ramsdale, 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, February 5, 2002; 105(5): 583 - 588. [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] |
||||

