Impact of intracoronary radiation on in-stent restenosis involving ostial lesions

One-Year Outcomes After Treatment of Ostial In-Stent Restenosis in Left Circumflex Versus Left Anterior Descending or Right Coronary Artery

The prognosis of left circumflex (LC) versus non-LC in-stent restenosis (ISR) ostial lesions following treatment has not been assessed. We aimed to assess this prognosis. Anecdotally, treatment of ostial LC ISR has been associated with high recurrence rates. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients from our institution who underwent coronary intervention of an ostial ISR lesion between 2003 and 2018. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Overall, 563 patients underwent ostial ISR lesion intervention, 144 for an ostial LC ISR lesion. Compared to patients with ostial ISR in non-LC lesions, patients with ostial LC ISR were older, had higher rates of diabetes mellitus and previous coronary bypass surgery. At 1-year follow-up, TLR-MACE rates were 26.6% in the LC group versus 18.4% in the non-LC group (p = 0.036). The TLR rate was also higher in the LC group compared to the non-LC group (p = 0.0498). Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated a higher TLR-MACE rate for LC versus non-LC ostial ISR lesions. In conclusion, our study shows increased event rates after treatment of LC versus non-LC ISR lesions. Further studies should be done to assess the optimal treatment approach for ostial LC ISR.

Brachytherapy for restenosis after stenting for coronary artery disease: its role in the drug-eluting stent era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent years have brought remarkable changes to the field of interventional cardiology. The need for repeat intervention due to restenosis, the most vexing long-term failure of percutaneous coronary intervention, has been significantly reduced owing to the introduction of two major advances, the vascular brachytherapy (VBT) and the drug-eluting stents (DES).

RECENT FINDINGS

Vascular brachytherapy has demonstrated its efficacy in limiting recurrence of existing in-stent restenosis. The past 2 years have sealed its reputation, with a variety of studies demonstrating its superiority over conventional therapy in challenging patient subsets with high risk for restenosis recurrence. Moreover, the long-term follow-up confirmed durability of this therapy, and the failures of VBT were characterized as easy to treat. Conversely, DES have shown spectacular efficacy at primarily preventing the first restenosis episode following the initial stent placement. Consequently, the role of VBT may be minimized, as the overall need for repeat revascularization is diminished as a result of the wide acceptance of DES. Furthermore, if the capacity of DES to treat in-stent restenosis is confirmed in randomized trials, they may eventually supersede VBT as the therapy of choice for in-stent restenosis.

SUMMARY

At present, VBT is the proven and durable therapeutic choice for patients with complex, diffuse in-stent restenosis who would otherwise have a very poor prognosis for long-term event-free survival. DES have emerged as remarkably effective in minimizing the first restenosis occurrence; they also represent a promising and competitive alternative to VBT for the treatment of in-stent restenosis.

Predictors of 32P beta brachytherapy failure in patients with high-risk in-stent restenosis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of coronary radiation therapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) has been established in several randomized clinical trials. The efficacy of this treatment in the general population is less well established.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We report our experience in 118 consecutive patients with nonselected high-risk ISR who had undergone successful percutaneous coronary intervention and brachytherapy with (32)P beta-irradiation and who were prospectively enrolled in a quantitative angiographic and clinical follow-up protocol at 7 months after the index procedure. The aim of this study was to investigate the independent predictor of angiographic restenosis after (32)P brachytherapy treatment.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 28.8% were diabetics. The mean lesion and mean radiated lengths were, respectively, 30.1 +/- 17.2 and 43.8 +/- 16.9 mm. The ISR pattern was diffuse in 96% of the treated lesions; in particular, 22.1% presented an occlusive pattern and 37.1% a proliferative pattern. At follow-up angiographic, restenosis and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates were, respectively, 20.8% and 29.6%. The univariate predictors of angiographic restenosis were procedural geographic miss, pattern IV ISR, manual pullback maneuver of the radiation source, preprocedural lesion percentage stenosis and preprocedural lesion MLD. At logistic regression analysis, only geographic miss and pattern IV ISR were independent predictors of post intracoronary radiation therapy (IRT) angiographic restenosis.

CONCLUSION

These data indicate that 7-month angiographic restenosis after (32)P IRT in complex patients with ISR is not a frequent event and is predicted mainly by an occlusive lesion at baseline and by procedural geographical miss.