Clinical outcomes by optical characteristics of neointima and treatment modality in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis.
Journal
EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology
ISSN: 1969-6213
Titre abrégé: EuroIntervention
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101251040
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Aug 2021
06 Aug 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
8
9
2020
medline:
11
8
2021
entrez:
7
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Drug-coated balloons (DCB) and drug-eluting stents (DES) represent the currently recommended treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) allows detailed neointimal characterisation which can guide treatment strategies. The aims of this study were first, to assess the relation between neointimal pattern and clinical outcomes following in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment, and second, to explore a potential interaction between neointimal pattern and treatment modality relative to clinical outcomes. Patients undergoing OCT-guided treatment (DCB or DES) of ISR in three European centres were included. Based on the median of distribution of non-homogeneous neointima quadrants, patients were categorised into low and high inhomogeneity groups. A total of 197 patients (low inhomogeneity=100 and high inhomogeneity=97) were included. There were no significant differences in terms of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (p=0.939) or target lesion revascularisation (TLR) (p=0.732) between the two groups. The exploratory analysis showed a significant interaction between neointimal pattern and treatment modality regarding MACE (pint=0.006) and TLR (pint=0.022). DES showed a significant advantage over DCB in the high (MACE: HR 0.26 [0.10-0.65], p=0.004; TLR: HR 0.28 [0.11-0.69], p=0.006), but not in the low inhomogeneity group (MACE: p=0.917; TLR: p=0.797). In patients with ISR treated with DCB or DES, there were no significant differences in terms of MACE or TLR between the low and high inhomogeneity groups. A significant interaction was observed between treatment modality and neointimal pattern with an advantage of DES over DCB in the high and no difference in the low inhomogeneity group. This warrants confirmation from prospective dedicated studies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Drug-coated balloons (DCB) and drug-eluting stents (DES) represent the currently recommended treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) allows detailed neointimal characterisation which can guide treatment strategies.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
The aims of this study were first, to assess the relation between neointimal pattern and clinical outcomes following in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment, and second, to explore a potential interaction between neointimal pattern and treatment modality relative to clinical outcomes.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients undergoing OCT-guided treatment (DCB or DES) of ISR in three European centres were included. Based on the median of distribution of non-homogeneous neointima quadrants, patients were categorised into low and high inhomogeneity groups.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 197 patients (low inhomogeneity=100 and high inhomogeneity=97) were included. There were no significant differences in terms of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (p=0.939) or target lesion revascularisation (TLR) (p=0.732) between the two groups. The exploratory analysis showed a significant interaction between neointimal pattern and treatment modality regarding MACE (pint=0.006) and TLR (pint=0.022). DES showed a significant advantage over DCB in the high (MACE: HR 0.26 [0.10-0.65], p=0.004; TLR: HR 0.28 [0.11-0.69], p=0.006), but not in the low inhomogeneity group (MACE: p=0.917; TLR: p=0.797).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with ISR treated with DCB or DES, there were no significant differences in terms of MACE or TLR between the low and high inhomogeneity groups. A significant interaction was observed between treatment modality and neointimal pattern with an advantage of DES over DCB in the high and no difference in the low inhomogeneity group. This warrants confirmation from prospective dedicated studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32894230
pii: EIJ-D-20-00662
doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-20-00662
pmc: PMC9724978
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e388-e395Références
Clin Res Cardiol. 2019 Sep;108(9):1059-1068
pubmed: 30783752
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Jun;8(6):e002230
pubmed: 26047993
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2014 Jan;11(1):13-23
pubmed: 24189405
Eur Heart J. 2020 Oct 7;41(38):3715-3728
pubmed: 31511862
Heart. 2014 Jan;100(2):153-9
pubmed: 24270744
Coron Artery Dis. 2019 Jan;30(1):1-8
pubmed: 30379646
Eur Heart J. 2013 Nov;34(42):3304-13
pubmed: 23824827
Am Heart J. 2009 Aug;158(2):284-93
pubmed: 19619707
Minerva Cardioangiol. 2017 Feb;65(1):61-67
pubmed: 27676648
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Dec 26;9(24):2511-2523
pubmed: 27889345
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Oct;16(10):1101-11
pubmed: 25762559
Eur Heart J. 2015 Aug 21;36(32):2147-59
pubmed: 25994755
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Jun 24;63(24):2659-73
pubmed: 24632282
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Mar;15(3):307-15
pubmed: 24042176
EuroIntervention. 2017 Jun 20;13(3):294-302
pubmed: 28320686
Lancet. 2015 Aug 15;386(9994):655-64
pubmed: 26334160
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jul 23;11(14):1340-1350
pubmed: 30025727
Eur Heart J. 2015 Dec 14;36(47):3320-31
pubmed: 26417060
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Mar 15;57(11):1314-22
pubmed: 21376502
Circulation. 1999 Nov 2;100(18):1872-8
pubmed: 10545431
Eur Heart J. 2019 Jan 7;40(2):87-165
pubmed: 30165437