4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Immunosuppressive therapy for the prevention of restenosis after coronary artery stent implantation (IMPRESS study)

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 40, Issue 11, Pages 1935-1942

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02562-7

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES This study tested the effect of oral prednisone on clinical and angiographic restenosis rate after successful stent implantation in patients with persistent elevation of systemic markers of inflammation after the procedure. BACKGROUND Experimental studies have shown that corticosteroid have the potential to reduce the inflammatory response associated with stent implantation. METHODS Eighty-three patients undergoing successful stenting with C-reactive protein (CRP) levels >0.5 mg/dl 72 h after the procedure were randomized to receive oral prednisone or placebo for 45 days. The primary clinical end point was 12-month event-free survival rate (defined as freedom from death, from myocardial infarction, and from recurrence of symptoms requiring additional revascularization). The angiographic end points were restenosis rate and late loss at six months. RESULTS Twelve-month event-free survival rates were 93% and 65% in patients treated with prednisone and placebo, respectively (relative risk [RR] 0.18, 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.05 to 0.61, p = 0.0063). Six-month restenosis rate and late loss were lower in prednisone-treated than in placebo-treated patients (7% vs. 33%, p = 0.001, and 0.39 +/- 0.6 mm vs. 0.85 +/- 0.6 mm, p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS In patients with persistently high CRP levels after successful coronary artery stent implantation, oral immunosuppressive therapy with prednisone results in a striking reduction of clinical events and angiographic restenosis rate. (C) 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available