Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: The best therapeutic alternative for patients suffering from in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation remains to be elucidated.

Objective: To characterize the pattern, treatment and outcomes of DES[1]-related in-stent restenosis in patients treated at our institution.

Methods: We determined the incidence and major adverse clinical events in 71 consecutive patients with DES failure among 2473 patients who were treated with 2548 drug-eluting stents between 2004 and 2007. We analyzed the clinical data, procedural parameters and clinical outcomes.

Results: The type and number of stents implanted were as follows: Cypher (n=1808), Endeavor (421) and Taxus (319) of these, 53 (2.9%), 10 (2.4%), and 8 (2.5%) patients respectively presented with restenosis. The mean time to restenosis was 11.3 ± 9.9 months. Patients’ mean age was 65 ± 11 years 75% were male, and 68% had diabetes mellitus. Unstable angina was the clinical presentation in 52 (73%). At 6 months, 3 patients had developed myocardial infarction (4.2%), repeat restenosis at follow-up was diagnosed in 8 patients (11.3%), the overall major adverse clinical events rate was 18.3% (13 patients), and 2 patients died (2.8%).

Conclusions: Drug-eluting stent-related restenosis is relatively infrequent but remains a clinical challenge. It occurs more frequently in complex lesion subsets, but the overall intermediate-term prognosis is tolerable.  

[1] DES = drug-eluting stent

Background: Although unprotected left main coronary artery disease is considered by contemporary guidelines to be an indication for surgery, percutaneous coronary intervention may be necessary in patients at high surgical risk.

Objectives: To assess the outcome of angioplasty in the treatment of unprotected LMCA[1] disease.

Methods: Angiographic and clinical data were collected prospectively for all patients who underwent emergent or non-emergent (planned) therapeutic PCI[2] for unprotected LMCA disease at our center from 2003 to 2007. Baseline values were compared with findings at 1, 6 and 12 months after the procedure.

Results: The study group comprised 71 consecutive patients with a mean age of 74 ± 12 years; 63% were men, and 31% had diabetes. Forty-three patients had a planned procedure and 28 an emergent procedure. Mean EuroScore was 7.3 ± 3.6 (range 5–12). Forty-nine percent of the procedures were performed with bare metal stents and 51% with drug-eluting stents. Procedural success was achieved in 100% of cases. The overall mortality rate was 11.3% at 1 month, 18.3% at 6 months and 19.7% at 12 months. Elective PCI was associated with significantly lower mortality (2.3% vs. 25% at 1 month, 4.6% vs. 39% at 6 months and 6.9% vs. 39% at 12 months), and the use of drug-eluting stents was associated with lower rates of target vessel revascularization and major adverse cardiac events than use of bare metal stents (2.8% vs. 14% at 1 month, 8.3% vs. 43% at 6 and 12 months). Variables that correlated with increased mortality or MACE[3] at 6 and 12 months were cardiogenic shock, emergent PCI, ejection fraction < 35%, renal failure, distal left main stenosis location, and reference diameter < 3 mm.

Conclusions: PCI is a feasible and relatively safe therapeutic option for unprotected LMCA. The less favorable outcome of emergent compared to planned PCI is probably attributable to the overwhelming acute myocardial ischemic injury in emergent cases. The use of drug-eluting stents may improve the intermediate-term restenosis rate.

[1] LMCA = left main coronary artery

[2] PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention

Background: The use of the bilateral internal mammary arteries has been reserved mainly for younger and low risk patients.

Aim: To assess the safety and efficacy of BIMA[1] grafting in older patients (≥ 70 years).

Methods: We reviewed the records of all consecutive patients ≥ 70 years old who underwent coronary artery bypass surgery with a BIMA graft in our institute over a 2 year period. Demographic data, operative data, perioperative morbidity and mortality were recorded. Findings were compared with a matched-size group of patients who underwent CABG[2] with a left internal mammary artery graft to left anterior descending artery.

Results: The study sample included 136 patients, of whom 68 underwent BIMA grafting and 68 LIMA[3] grafting. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in the two groups. There was no significant difference in operative mortality between the BIMA and LIMA groups (1.5% vs. 0%, P = 0.3) or in mortality during follow-up at a mean of 16 months (4.4% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.4, respectively). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of perioperative complications, re-admission and re-intervention rates during follow-up. Significant between-group differences were noted for mean cardiopulmonary bypass time (93.2 ± 34.7 BIMA vs. 108.8 ± 40.7 LIMA min, P = 0.02) and for red blood cell transfusion (1.9 ± 1.9 vs. 4.3 ± 2.8 packed cells/patient, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: The performance of mainly arterial revascularization with BIMA grafting in patients 70 years or older is as safe as LIMA grafting, with the added advantage of being a better conduit than saphenous vein graft, requiring fewer blood transfusions, and shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time.