Treatment for in-stent restenosis: patient-specific decision rather than universal recommendation

Impact of post-procedure stenosis on outcomes of patients with severe intracranial stenosis treated with intracranial stent placement

BACKGROUND

The optimal target post-procedure stenosis after percutaneous angioplasty and stent placement (PTAS) for intracranial stenosis is unknown. We determined the effect of post-procedure stenosis after intracranial PTAS on subsequent clinical events in patients with severe symptomatic intracranial stenosis.

METHODS

We categorized the severity of post-procedure stenosis as '<30%', '30-49%', and '≥50%' among 207 patients who underwent PTAS in a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Outcomes included stroke or death within 72 hours and within 30 days, ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days of treatment, and stroke or death within 30 days or stroke in the qualifying artery beyond 30 days (primary endpoint of the trial). Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed with adjustments for age, initial severity of stenosis, location of stenosis, and qualifying event. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for the primary endpoint stratified by post-procedure stenosis with log-rank analysis.

RESULTS

The severity of post-procedure stenosis was categorized as <30%, 30-49%, and ≥50% in 112, 73, and 22 patients, respectively. Compared with patients with post-procedure stenosis <30%, there was no difference in the risk of primary endpoint among patients with post-procedure stenoses of 30-49% (hazards ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.64 to 1.15) or those with ≥50% (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.43). Log-rank analysis did not demonstrate a difference in rates of primary endpoint between groups stratified by post-procedure stenosis (P=0.70).

CONCLUSION

In the absence of any benefit on short- and long-term outcomes, strategies to achieve a low severity of post-procedure stenosis among patients with severe intracranial stenosis may not be warranted.

Design and rationale for a real-world prospective, multicenter registry of myocardial revascularization failure and secondary revascularization: The REVASEC study

AIM

To investigate key aspects of the problem of myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and repeat or secondary myocardial revascularization (SR) in contemporary practice.

METHODS

The registry of secondary revascularization (REVASEC) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, prospective registry enhanced with data monitoring and independent event adjudication (ClinicalTrials.govNCT03349385). It includes patients with prior revascularization referred to coronary angiography for suspected MRF with broad inclusion criteria. The main objectives are to describe the characteristics of patients with prior revascularization referred for repeat angiography, to describe and the rate and mechanisms of MRF (stent or graft failure, coronary artery disease progression or residual coronary artery disease); to evaluate the management including medical treatment and SR of these patients; and to assess the prognosis according to the outlined causative mechanisms. The registry has one year follow up for the primary endpoint (Patient-oriented composite endpoint including all-cause death, any myocardial infarction or any new unplanned revascularization according to subsets of MRF), but extended follow-up will be carried out up to 5 years.

CONCLUSION

The REVASEC Registry will provide updated data on the characteristics, patterns of treatment, and 1-year outcomes of patients with MRF and SR in contemporary clinical practice.