OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a well developed collateral circulation predisposes to restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). DESIGN: Prospective observational study. PATIENTS AND SETTING: 58 patients undergoing elective single vessel PCI in a tertiary referral interventional cardiac unit in the UK. METHODS: Collateral flow index (CFI) was calculated as (Pw-Pv)/(Pa-Pv), where Pa, Pw, and Pv are aortic, coronary wedge, and right atrial pressures during maximum hyperaemia. Collateral supply was considered poor (CFI < 0.25) or good (CFI > or = 0.25). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-stent restenosis six months after PCI, classified as neointimal volume > or = 25% stent volume on intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), or minimum lumen area < or = 50% stent area on IVUS, or minimum lumen diameter < or = 50% reference vessel diameter on quantitative coronary angiography. RESULTS: Patients with good collaterals had more severe coronary stenoses at baseline (90 (11)% v 75 (16)%, p < 0.001). Restenosis rates were similar in poor and good collateral groups (35% v 43%, p = 0.76 for diameter restenosis, 27% v 45%, p = 0.34 for area restenosis, and 23% v 24%, p = 0.84 for volumetric restenosis). CFI was not correlated with diameter, area, or volumetric restenosis (r2 < 0.1 for each). By multivariate analysis, stent diameter, stent length, > 10% residual stenosis, and smoking history were predictive of restenosis. CONCLUSION: A well developed collateral circulation does not predict an increased risk of restenosis after PCI.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a well developed collateral circulation predisposes to restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). DESIGN: Prospective observational study. PATIENTS AND SETTING: 58 patients undergoing elective single vessel PCI in a tertiary referral interventional cardiac unit in the UK. METHODS: Collateral flow index (CFI) was calculated as (Pw-Pv)/(Pa-Pv), where Pa, Pw, and Pv are aortic, coronary wedge, and right atrial pressures during maximum hyperaemia. Collateral supply was considered poor (CFI < 0.25) or good (CFI > or = 0.25). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-stent restenosis six months after PCI, classified as neointimal volume > or = 25% stent volume on intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), or minimum lumen area < or = 50% stent area on IVUS, or minimum lumen diameter < or = 50% reference vessel diameter on quantitative coronary angiography. RESULTS:Patients with good collaterals had more severe coronary stenoses at baseline (90 (11)% v 75 (16)%, p < 0.001). Restenosis rates were similar in poor and good collateral groups (35% v 43%, p = 0.76 for diameter restenosis, 27% v 45%, p = 0.34 for area restenosis, and 23% v 24%, p = 0.84 for volumetric restenosis). CFI was not correlated with diameter, area, or volumetric restenosis (r2 < 0.1 for each). By multivariate analysis, stent diameter, stent length, > 10% residual stenosis, and smoking history were predictive of restenosis. CONCLUSION: A well developed collateral circulation does not predict an increased risk of restenosis after PCI.
Authors: R Hoffmann; G S Mintz; G R Dussaillant; J J Popma; A D Pichard; L F Satler; K M Kent; J Griffin; M B Leon Journal: Circulation Date: 1996-09-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: R Mehran; G S Mintz; M K Hong; F O Tio; O Bramwell; A Brahimi; K M Kent; A D Pichard; L F Satler; J J Popma; M B Leon Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: T Pohl; C Seiler; M Billinger; E Herren; K Wustmann; H Mehta; S Windecker; F R Eberli; B Meier Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: N Mercado; E Boersma; W Wijns; B J Gersh; C A Morillo; V de Valk; G A van Es; D E Grobbee; P W Serruys Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: S L Goldberg; A Loussararian; J De Gregorio; C Di Mario; R Albiero; A Colombo Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Pascal Meier; Andreas Indermuehle; Bertram Pitt; Tobias Traupe; Stefano F de Marchi; Tom Crake; Guido Knapp; Alexandra J Lansky; Christian Seiler Journal: BMC Med Date: 2012-06-21 Impact factor: 8.775