OBJECTIVE: Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT), deposited around subepicardial coronary vessels, may contribute directly to perivascular inflammation and smooth muscle cell proliferation. This study assessed the relationship between EAT and in-stent restenosis. METHODS: Four hundred and seven patients had received successful coronary intervention. EAT thickness was measured by echocardiography. Angiographic follow-up was obtained between 6 months and 2 years. Restenosis was defined as target lesion revascularization (TLR). EAT thickness of patients was compared by TLR controlling for additional well-known predictors of restenosis. The TLR-free survival analysis according to EAT thickness was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the differences between groups were assessed by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Median EAT thickness was significantly increased in patients undergoing TLR compared with those without restenosis (3.7 vs. 3.0 mm, p = 0.001). EAT thickness was one of the independent factors associated with restenosis (Odds ratio = 1.19, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.33, p = 0.007). The TLR-free survival of patients with thick EAT was significantly worse than patients with thin EAT (log-rank p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: EAT thickness is related with restenosis and may provide additional information for future restenosis.
OBJECTIVE: Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT), deposited around subepicardial coronary vessels, may contribute directly to perivascular inflammation and smooth muscle cell proliferation. This study assessed the relationship between EAT and in-stent restenosis. METHODS: Four hundred and seven patients had received successful coronary intervention. EAT thickness was measured by echocardiography. Angiographic follow-up was obtained between 6 months and 2 years. Restenosis was defined as target lesion revascularization (TLR). EAT thickness of patients was compared by TLR controlling for additional well-known predictors of restenosis. The TLR-free survival analysis according to EAT thickness was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the differences between groups were assessed by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Median EAT thickness was significantly increased in patients undergoing TLR compared with those without restenosis (3.7 vs. 3.0 mm, p = 0.001). EAT thickness was one of the independent factors associated with restenosis (Odds ratio = 1.19, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.33, p = 0.007). The TLR-free survival of patients with thick EAT was significantly worse than patients with thin EAT (log-rank p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: EAT thickness is related with restenosis and may provide additional information for future restenosis.