4.4 Article

Mechanisms and Patterns of Intravascular Ultrasound In-Stent Restenosis Among Bare Metal Stents and First- and Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 116, 期 9, 页码 1351-1357

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.07.058

关键词

-

资金

  1. Boston Scientific, China
  2. Banyu Life Science Foundation International
  3. Boston Scientific
  4. Medtronic
  5. Abbott Vascular
  6. Abiomed
  7. St. Jude Medical
  8. Vascular Dynamics
  9. Eli Lilly
  10. Edwards Life-sciences
  11. Volcano Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The most common causes of in-stent restenosis (ISR) are intimal hyperplasia and stent under expansion. The purpose of this study was to use intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to compare the ISR mechanisms of bare metal stents (BMS), first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), and second-generation DES. There were 298 ISR lesions including 52 BMS, 73 sirolimus-eluting stents, 52 paclitaxel-eluting stents, 16 zotarolimus-eluting stents, and 105 everolimus-eluting stent. Mean patient age was 66.6 +/- 1.1 years, 74.2% were men, and 48.3% had diabetes mellitus. BMS restenosis presented later (70.0 +/- 66.7 months) with more intimal hyperplasia compared with DES (BMS 58.6 +/- 15.5%, first-generation DES 52.6 +/- 20.9%, second-generation DES 48.2 +/- 22.2%, p = 0.02). Although reference lumen areas were similar in BMS and first- and second-generation DES, restenotic DES were longer (BMS 21.8 +/- 13.5 mm, first-generation DES 29.4 +/- 16.1 mm, second-generation DES 32.1 +/- 18.7 mm, p = 0.003), and stent areas were smaller (BMS 7.2 +/- 2.4 mm(2), first-generation DES 6.1 +/- 2.1 mm(2), second-generation DES 5.7 +/- 2.0 mm(2), p < 0.001). Stent fracture was seen only in DES (first-generation DES 7 [5.0%], second-generation DES 8 [7.4%], p = 0.13). In conclusion, restenotic first- and second-generation DES were characterized by less neointimal hyperplasia, smaller stent areas, longer stent lengths, and more stent fractures than restenotic BMS. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据