Literature DB >> 19195510

An integrated TAXUS IV, V, and VI intravascular ultrasound analysis of the predictors of edge restenosis after bare metal or paclitaxel-eluting stents.

Jian Liu1, Akiko Maehara, Gary S Mintz, Neil J Weissman, Alan Yu, Hong Wang, Lazar Mandinov, Jeffrey J Popma, Stephen G Ellis, Eberhard Grube, Keith D Dawkins, Gregg W Stone.   

Abstract

We used intravascular ultrasound data after stent implantation from the TAXUS IV, V, and VI trials to determine predictors of angiographic stent edge restenosis. In the combined TAXUS IV, V, and VI trials, intravascular ultrasound was performed at implantation in 255 patients with bare metals stents (BMSs) and 276 patients with paclitaxel-eluting stents who underwent quantitative coronary angiography at 9 months. At follow-up, 6 BMSs (2.5%) had proximal edge and 6 BMSs (2.4%) had distal edge angiographic restenosis; 14 TAXUS stents (5.2%) had proximal edge and 1 TAXUS stent (0.4%) had distal edge angiographic restenosis. Although univariate analysis identified external elastic membrane, lumen areas, and plaque burden (external elastic membrane minus lumen/ external elastic membrane) as predictors of 9-month angiographic edge restenosis in the overall cohort and in BMS- and TAXUS-treated patients separately, only edge plaque burden was an independent predictor of 9-month angiographic edge restenosis. Receiver operator characteristic analysis showed that residual plaque burden, but not edge lumen area, was predictive of 9-month angiographic edge restenosis in BMS-treated patients (cutoff 47.7%, c = 0.70, p = 0.0244) and in TAXUS-treated patients (cutoff 47.1%, c = 0.69, p = 0.0137). In conclusion, residual edge plaque burden predicts stent edge restenosis after BMS or TAXUS stent implantation and the optimal plaque burden for stent edge landing zones are the same for BMSs and TAXUS stents, independent of vessel size and edge lumen dimensions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19195510     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.10.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  7 in total

Review 1.  Use of intravascular imaging in managing coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Sanda Jegere; Inga Narbute; Andrejs Erglis
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2014-06-26

2.  Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound in Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Andres Vasquez; Neville Mistry; Jasvindar Singh
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2014-08

3.  Comparison of full lesion coverage versus spot drug-eluting stent implantation for coronary artery stenoses.

Authors:  Seunghwan Kim; Kyeong Ho Yun; Woong Chol Kang; Dong-Ho Shin; Jung-Sun Kim; Byeong-Keuk Kim; Young-Guk Ko; Donghoon Choi; Yangsoo Jang; Myeong-Ki Hong
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.759

4.  Optical coherence tomography versus intravascular ultrasound for culprit lesion assessment in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Blaz Mrevlje; Paweł Kleczyński; Igor Kranjec; Jacek Jąkała; Marko Noc; Łukasz Rzeszutko; Artur Dziewierz; Marcin Wizimirski; Dariusz Dudek; Jacek Legutko
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 1.426

5.  Drug-Coated Balloon-Only Angioplasty Outcomes in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients with De Novo Small Coronary Vessels Disease.

Authors:  Botey Katamu Benjamin; Wenjie Lu; Zhanying Han; Liang Pan; Xi Wang; Xiaofei Qin; Guoju Sun; Xule Wang; Yingguang Shan; Ran Li; Xiaolin Zheng; Wencai Zhang; Qiangwei Shi; Shuai Zhou; Sen Guo; Peng Qin; Chhatra Pratap Singh; Jianzeng Dong; Chunguang Qiu
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 6.  Intravascular imaging in coronary stent restenosis: Prevention, characterization, and management.

Authors:  Amr Abouelnour; Tommaso Gori
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-08-09

7.  Procedure-Related Differences and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Assisted by Optical Coherence Tomography between New and Earlier Generation Software (Ultreon™ 1.0 Software vs. AptiVue™ Software).

Authors:  Rafał Januszek; Wojciech Siłka; Karol Sabatowski; Krzysztof Piotr Malinowski; Grzegorz Heba; Sławomir Surowiec; Michał Chyrchel; Łukasz Rzeszutko; Leszek Bryniarski; Andrzej Surdacki; Krzysztof Bartuś; Stanisław Bartuś
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Dev Dis       Date:  2022-07-06
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.