AIMS: Although the outcomes of various treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been reported, the optimal treatment of recurrent ISR lesions after DES implantation for ISR lesions was unknown. This study compared the efficacy between DES implantation and balloon angioplasty (BA) for recurrent ISR lesions after DES implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 2003 to 2010, DES were implanted in 1,101 ISR lesions, of which 148 recurrent ISR lesions (142 patients) were treated with BA (76 lesions, 72 patients) and DES implantation (72 lesions, 70 patients). Clinical outcomes were evaluated for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularisation (TLR). Angiographic outcomes were evaluated by follow-up angiography at six to eight months after procedure. At angiographic follow-up (94.4% of all patients), the binary restenosis rate was significantly lower in DES implantation (25.0%) than in BA (64.4%, p<0.001), whereas late lumen loss was similar between DES implantation and BA (0.80±0.78 mm vs. 0.87±0.79 mm, p=0.60). The incidence of four-year MACE was significantly higher in BA (75.2%) than in DES implantation (45.8%, p<0.001), mainly because of the lower TLR rate in DES implantation (60.5% vs. 27.6%, p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that BA is an independent predictor of TLR, followed by non-focal lesion, non-intravascular ultrasound guidance, and dyslipidaemia. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of recurrent ISR lesions, DES implantation is markedly more effective with a lower incidence of TLR compared to BA.
AIMS: Although the outcomes of various treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been reported, the optimal treatment of recurrent ISR lesions after DES implantation for ISR lesions was unknown. This study compared the efficacy between DES implantation and balloon angioplasty (BA) for recurrent ISR lesions after DES implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 2003 to 2010, DES were implanted in 1,101 ISR lesions, of which 148 recurrent ISR lesions (142 patients) were treated with BA (76 lesions, 72 patients) and DES implantation (72 lesions, 70 patients). Clinical outcomes were evaluated for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularisation (TLR). Angiographic outcomes were evaluated by follow-up angiography at six to eight months after procedure. At angiographic follow-up (94.4% of all patients), the binary restenosis rate was significantly lower in DES implantation (25.0%) than in BA (64.4%, p<0.001), whereas late lumen loss was similar between DES implantation and BA (0.80±0.78 mm vs. 0.87±0.79 mm, p=0.60). The incidence of four-year MACE was significantly higher in BA (75.2%) than in DES implantation (45.8%, p<0.001), mainly because of the lower TLR rate in DES implantation (60.5% vs. 27.6%, p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that BA is an independent predictor of TLR, followed by non-focal lesion, non-intravascular ultrasound guidance, and dyslipidaemia. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of recurrent ISR lesions, DES implantation is markedly more effective with a lower incidence of TLR compared to BA.