Gutiérrez-Leonar H, Aguilar-Oliva R, Galván-Vargas CG, Valenzuela-Hernandez JC, Martín-Hernandez P, Hernández-Casas AS, Meneses-Bonilla A

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 61-68
PDF size: 331.13 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Coronary stent restenosis is a neointimal hyperplasia, which leads to the obstruction of the previously treated lesion. Its incidence is around 10%. The treatment is a new intervention with balloon angioplasty and implantation of a new stent to reestablish blood flow.
Objective: To determine if there is a difference between the different treatment strategies against intrastent restenosis such as the bioabsorbable endoprosthesis, drug-eluting stent and drug-eluting balloon, evaluated by angiography after 12 months of being treated an intrastent stenosis.
Materials and Methods: Observational, ambispective, crosssectional and comparative study consisting of the evaluation of patients with angina-compatible disease in the following 12 months to the treatment for intrastent stenosis. We reviewed the angiographies of the patients who entered the Cath Lab of the Hospital Central Militar for evaluation of intrastent restenosis due to previous balloon angioplasty or previous coronary intervention with implantation of a drug-eluting or bioabsorbable stent after angina.
Results: Three groups were treated with intrastent stenosis, the first using bioabsorbable stent, the second with drug-eluting stent and another group treated with a medicated balloon; in the control angiographies performed on patients with angina, a statistically significant difference was found in the therapy used for intrastent stenosis (15.7%, 65.1%, 70%, p ‹ 0.001), with a higher success rate in bioabsorbable stent group in relation to the other two therapies. However, there was no difference in the treatment of intrastent stenosis with the use of drug-eluting stents vs. medicated balloon (65.1%, 70%, p ‹ 0.75).

REFERENCES

1. Pascual FD, Valdés CM, Picó AF, Pinar BE, Iñigo GL, López PR, et al. Utilidad de los predictores de reestenosis angiográfica en la predicción de reestenosis clínica de stents intracoronarios. Rev Esp Cardiol 2000; 53(9): 1183-1188.

2. Mehran R, Dangas G, Abizaid AS, Mintz GS, Lansky AJ, Satler LF, et al. Angigraphic Patterns of In-Stent Restenosis: Classification and implications for long-term outcome. Circulation. 1999;100(18):1872-1878.

3. Singh M, Gersh BJ, McClelland RL, Ho KK, Willerson JT, Penny WF, et al. Clinical and angiographic predictors of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the Prevention of Restenosis With Tranilast and Its Outcomes (PRESTO) trial. Circulation. 2004;109(22):2727-2731.

4. Touchard A, Schwartz R, Modelos preclínicos de reestenosis: retos y éxitos. Rev Esp Cardiol Supl. 2013;13(E):13-19.

5. Lee JM, Park J, Kang J, Jeon KH, Jung JH, Lee SE, et al. Comparison among drug-eluting balloon, drug-eluting stent, and plain balloon angioplasty for treatmentof in-stent Restenosis: a network metanalysis of 11 randomized controlled trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(3):382-394.

6. Lambert B, Leigh L, Rapoza R, Endoprótesis coronarias bioabsorbibles. Rev Esp Cardiol Supl. 2013;13(E):29-39.

7. Onuma Y, Serruys P, Bioresorbable Scaffold The Advent of a New Era in Percutaneous Coronary and Peripheral Revascularization? Circulation. 2011;123(7):779-797.

8. Nagai H, Okamura A, Nakatani S, Iwakura K, Fujii K, Optical coherence tomography guided coronary intervention is useful to decide the strategy for in-stent restenosis lesions after drug-eluting stent implantation. JACC 2012 Volume 59, Issue 13.

9. Alfonso F, Nuccio J, Cuevas C, Cárdenas A, Gonzalo N, Jimenez- Quevedo P, Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with bioabsorbable vascular scaffolds. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63(25) 2875 -2875.