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: Left main coronary artery disease is considered a surgical indication in most centers. However, in some cases prohibited from surgery or in patients with prior bypass grafting, there is a need for percutaneous coronary intervention in LMCA[1] disease scenarios.

Objectives: To assess the clinical outcomes among patients undergoing stent-based LMCA angioplasty.

Methods: We identified 34 consecutive patients who underwent PCI[2] in LMCA at our institution. Procedural data and clinical outcomes were obtained for all patients.

Results: The mean age was 71 ± 12 years. There were 27 elective and 7 emergent procedures performed on 23 “protected” LMCA and 11 “unprotected” LMCA. In emergent procedures, the prevalence of cardiogenic shock (29% vs. 0%, P = 0.04) in patients with prior coronary bypass (29% vs. 8.5%, P = 0.007) was significantly higher compared to elective cases. Procedural success in emergent procedures was significantly lower than in elective procedures (71 vs. 100%, P = 0.04). In emergent versus elective procedures, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher (43 vs. 0%, P = 0.006). The rate of cumulative major adverse cardiac events at 1 and 6 months was 43% and 71% in emergent cases versus 0% and 33% in elective cases (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). In patients with “unprotected” LMCA the overall major cardiac events at 1 month was higher compared to “protected” LMCA patients (27 vs. 0%, P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed emergent procedure as an independent predictor for mortality and adverse cardiac events (odds ratio 6.7; 95% confidence interval 1.2–36; P = 0.02).

Conclusions: Percutaneous interventions in LMCA are feasible and relatively safe in carefully selected cases. Procedural outcomes and clinical prognosis is highly dependent on the nature of disease prior to angioplasty (e.g., elective vs. emergent procedure) as well as on protection of the LMCA by patent grafts.