Literature DB >> 30302107

Mehran in-stent restenosis classification adapted for coronary bifurcations: the impact on 4-year follow-up from randomized clinical studies POLBOS I and II.

Jacek Bil1, Robert J Gil1, Adam Kern2, Luis A Inigo-Garcia3, Radoslaw Formuszewicz4, Slawomir Dobrzycki5.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30302107      PMCID: PMC6173092          DOI: 10.5114/aic.2018.78335

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej        ISSN: 1734-9338            Impact factor:   1.426


× No keyword cloud information.

Introduction

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with stent deployment are the most widely performed procedures in the therapy of symptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD). In the last three decades, PCI with stent deployment has changed the practice in cardiology. Drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly reduced in-stent restenosis (ISR) rates – one of the key limitations of bare metal stents. In consequence, DES were rapidly and widely accepted, which allowed more complex coronary interventions, including bifurcations, to be performed. Nevertheless, ISR has remained a troublesome late stent complication [1, 2]. Multiple classification systems addressed the problem of ISR severity. The Mehran classification is a morphologic system which divides ISR lesions into four patterns: from focal pattern I when ISR is ≤ 10 mm in length within the stent to pattern IV when the ISR is the cause of vessel occlusion [3].

Aim

The aim of our study was to propose a modified Mehran restenosis classification adapted to bifurcation lesions and preliminarily assess its value in the 4-year follow-up on data from two randomized studies, POLBOS I and POLBOS II, that compared dedicated bifurcation BiOSS stents with regular drug-eluting stents (rDES) [4-6].

Material and methods

POLBOS I and POLBOS II were international, multi-center, randomized, open-label, controlled studies described previously [4, 6]. Briefly, the inclusion criteria were: stable CAD or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), age ≥ 18 years, de novo coronary bifurcation lesion, main vessel (MV) diameter ≥ 2.5 mm, and side branch (SB) diameter ≥ 2.0 mm on visual estimation. The Institutional Review Board of each participating center approved the study protocol (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: POLBOS I – NCT02192840, POLBOS II – NCT02198300). After providing written informed consent, patients were randomly assigned to one of two treatment strategies: BiOSS Expert (in POLBOS I)/BiOSS LIM (in POLBOS II) stent implantation or rDES implantation [7-9]. Provisional T-stenting was the default strategy. The stent nominal diameter was chosen according to the distal reference, and after stent deployment, the proximal part of the stent was optimized, if needed, with proximal optimization technique (POT) to obtain the proper apposition. Clinical follow-up was performed by telephone 1, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months after the procedure. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study period. Follow-up coronary angiography was mandatory at 12 months unless clinically indicated earlier. The primary endpoint was the cumulative rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) consisting of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary endpoints included cardiac death, all-cause death, MI, TLR, target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis (ST), and device success. Cardiac death included death resulting from an acute MI, sudden cardiac death, death due to heart failure, and death due to cardiac procedures. All deaths were deemed cardiac unless proven otherwise. Myocardial infarction was defined according to the third universal definition [10]. Bearing in mind the different approach for bifurcation stenting (nominal stent diameter chosen on the basis of distal reference diameter and then optimization of the proximal part of the stent with POT and final kissing ballons technique (FKB)) we proposed a modified Mehran restenosis classification adapted for coronary bifurcation lesions (Figure 1). We divided the stent according to the parts of the bifurcation, i.e. the MV and main branch (MB), and additionally we took into consideration the SB since it is an inseparable part of the bifurcation complex. In each pattern (I–IV) we introduced subgroups to localize the restenosis (in MV, in MB, in SB, or in combinations). The MV was defined as the proximal part of the bifurcation up to the take-off of the SB, and the MB was defined as the distal part of the bifurcation below the take-off of the SB.
Figure 1

Modified Mehran restenosis classification. In each pattern (I–IV) we introduced subgroups to localize the restenosis (in MV-MB, in SB, or in both, respectively). Point IIC is optional depending on the SB stenting, in other cases SB restenosis characterizes the lesion irrespectively of whether it was stented or not since SB is an inseparable part of the bifurcation complex

MV – main vessel, MB – main branch, SB – side branch.

Modified Mehran restenosis classification. In each pattern (I–IV) we introduced subgroups to localize the restenosis (in MV-MB, in SB, or in both, respectively). Point IIC is optional depending on the SB stenting, in other cases SB restenosis characterizes the lesion irrespectively of whether it was stented or not since SB is an inseparable part of the bifurcation complex MV – main vessel, MB – main branch, SB – side branch.

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables were presented as mean ± standard deviation. Categorical data were presented as numbers (%). Continuous variables were compared using an unpaired two-sided Student t-test, and categorical data using the χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. If the distribution was not normal on the Shapiro-Wilk test, the Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used. P-values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. The significance level was set at 0.05. Statistical analyses were performed using R 3.0.2 for OS (R Foundation, Vienna, Austria).

Results

Our population of 445 patients, with 222 patients in the BiOSS group and 223 patients in the rDES group, was analyzed. In the BiOSS group there were 24 (10.8%) cases of restenosis and in the rDES group 17 (7.6%) cases at 12-month follow-up (the rate of angiographic control was 90.3%). Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics of patients with restenosis are presented in Table I. In the rDES group in patients with restenosis there was a higher rate of diabetes type 2 (33% vs. 52.9%, p < 0.05) and a history of smoking (12.5% vs. 41.2%, p < 0.05) and a lower rate of hypertension (91.7% vs. 76.5%, p < 0.05) compared with the BiOSS group. In the rDES group in patients with restenosis there was a higher rate of SB predilatation (29.2% vs. 47.2%, p < 0.05), final kissing balloon technique (25% vs. 52.9%, p < 0.05), and additional stent in the SB (20.8% vs. 47.1%, p < 0.05) compared with the BiOSS group.
Table I

Baseline population characteristics in the whole population

ParameterBiOSS grouprDES group
No restenosis (n = 198)Restenosis (n = 24)No restenosis (n = 206)Restenosis (n = 17)
Baseline clinical characteristics:
 Age [years]66.6 ±9.765.2 ±12.666.5 ±9.165.6 ±9.5
 Women57 (28.8%)5 (20.8%)61 (29.6%)3 (17.6%)
 Hypertension158 (79.8%)22 (91.7%)158 (76.7%)13 (76.5%)**
 Hypercholesterolemia143 (72.2%)17 (70.8%)136 (66%)14 (82.4%)*
 Diabetes type 282 (41.4%)8 (33.3%)63 (30.6%)9 (52.9%)*,**
 Prior myocardial infarction85 (42.9%)14 (58.3%)*82 (39.8%)8 (47.1%)
 Prior PCI101 (51%)11 (45.8%)109 (52.9%)6 (35.3%)*
 Coronary artery bypass graft17 (8.6%)4 (16.7%)19 (9.2%)3 (17.6%)
 Chronic kidney disease22 (11.1%)1 (4.2%)16 (7.8%)3 (17.6%)
 History of smoking44 (22.2%)3 (12.5%)50 (24.3%)7 (41.2%)*,**
Clinical indication for PCI:
 Planned PCI167 (84.3%)19 (79.2%)176 (85.4%)10 (58.8%)*,**
 UA/NSTEMI31 (15.7%)5 (20.8%)30 (14.6%)7 (41.2%)*,**
True bifurcation167 (84.3%)11 (45.8%)*176 (85.4%)9 (52.9%)*
Left main bifurcation57 (28.8%)5 (20.8%)51 (24.8%)6 (35.3%)
Procedural characteristics:
 Main vessel predilatation117 (59.1%)20 (83.3%)*145 (70.4%)14 (82.4%)
 Side branch predilatation67 (33.8%)7 (29.2%)57 (27.7%)8 (47.1%)*,**
 Olimus-eluting stents88 (44.4%)14 (58.3%)148 (71.8%)7 (41.2%)*,**
 Paclitaxel-eluting stents110 (55.6%)10 (41.7%)58 (28.2%)10 (58.8%)*,**
 Proximal optimization technique81 (40.9%)2 (8.3%)*152 (73.8%)1 (5.9%)*
 Final kissing balloon65 (32.8%)6 (25%)101 (49%)9 (52.9%)**
 Additional stent in side branch17 (8.6%)5 (20.8%)7 (3.4%)8 (47.1%)*,**

PCI – percutaneous coronary intervention, UA/NSTEMI – unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction

p < 0.05 no restenosis vs restenosis in BiOSS or rDES group

p < 0.05 restenosis between BiOSS and rDES groups.

Baseline population characteristics in the whole population PCI – percutaneous coronary intervention, UA/NSTEMI – unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction p < 0.05 no restenosis vs restenosis in BiOSS or rDES group p < 0.05 restenosis between BiOSS and rDES groups. The rates of restenosis in the BiOSS group in the MV, MB and SB were 41.7% (n = 10), 37.5% (n = 9) and 54.2% (n = 13), respectively, whereas rates of restenosis in the rDES group in the MV, MB and SB were 35.3% (n = 6), 41.2% (n = 7) and 64.7% (n = 11), respectively. Type I was observed in 58.3% and 52.9% in BiOSS and rDES groups, respectively, whereas the other types were less frequent (type II: 20.8% vs. 29.4%; type III: 8.3% vs. 11.8%; type IV: 12.5% vs. 5.9%). In the BiOSS group most commonly restenosis type IA (focal, in MV) was observed (28.6%), whereas in rDES restenosis type IC (focal, in SB) was most common, with an incidence of 17.7% (Figure 1). In the BiOSS group 2 (8.3%) restenosis cases were treated with CABG, 4 (16.7%) with plain old ballon angioplasty/drug-eluting ballon (POBA/DEB) and 18 (75%) with another DES implantation. In the rDES group 1 (5.9%) restenosis case was treated with CABG, 4 (23.5%) with POBA/DEB and 12 (70.6%) with another DES implantation. At 12 months after the first ISR the death rates were 0, 0, 25% (n = 1) and 0 for types I, II, III, IV, respectively; the MI rates were 4.3% (n = 1), 0, 0 and 0, whereas the TLR rates were 17.4% (n = 4), 20% (n = 2), 25% (n = 1) and 50% (n = 2). There were no statistical differences between BiOSS and rDES. At 36 months after the first ISR the death rates were 4.3% (n = 1), 0, 25% (n = 1) and 0 for types I, II, III, IV, respectively; the MI rates were 8.6% (n = 2), 10% (n = 1), 0 and 0, whereas the TLR rates were 26.1% (n = 6), 30% (n = 3), 25% (n = 1) and 50% (n = 2). There were no statistical differences between BiOSS and rDES.

Discussion

In-stent restenosis manifests in different angiographic patterns. We have proposed a classification which takes into account not only lesion length but also the location of the neointimal proliferation relative to the initially implanted stent in the bifurcation complex as well as to the stages of the PCI reflecting the proper stent apposition. There were no significant differences between BiOSS stents and rDES restenosis profile. In the original Mehran classification 12-month clinical event rates were evenly high, without significant differences between groups regarding death or MI. However, a significant increase in TLR with increasing levels of ISR classification (class I, 19%; class II, 35%; class III, 50%; and class IV, 83%; p < 0.0001) was observed. This was caused by significantly increasing rates of PCI (15%, 26%, 36%, and 67% in classes I to IV, respectively; p < 0.0001) as well as CABG (4%, 8%, 14%, and 17% in classes I to IV, respectively; p < 0.0001) [3]. In our paper we obtained lower TLR rates. Although we treated bifurcation lesions characterized by higher failure rates, we used drug-eluting stents (mainly second generation), which perform better than bare metal stents available in 1999. Moreover, the procedure technique is quite different with FKB performed quite often and mandatory POT. Also, opposite to Mehran’s initial paper we did not observe a very high rate of subsequent revascularizations after interventional therapy (ISR treatment) with currently available treatment modalities in patients presenting with higher ISR classes. Similar results were obtained both in the RIBS and RIBS II trials [11, 12]. In further studies, it would be of interest to verify whether the performance of the PCI with bifurcation lesions according to the European Bifurcation Club, especially performing POT or not, has an influence on the restenosis profile and the nature of such change [13].

Conclusions

In-stent restenosis presents with different angiographic patterns that might provide helpful prognostic information. There were no significant differences between the BiOSS stent and rDES restenosis profile in short- or long-term follow-up.

Conflict of interest

Robert J. Gil is a Balton consultant. Other authors declare no conflict of interest.
  13 in total

1.  Assessment of vascular response to BiOSS LIM C® stents vs Orsiro® stents in the porcine coronary artery model.

Authors:  Jacek Bil; Robert J Gil; Tomasz Pawlowski; Krzysztof P Milewski
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ther       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.023

2.  Third universal definition of myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Allan S Jaffe; Maarten L Simoons; Bernard R Chaitman; Harvey D White; Hugo A Katus; Bertil Lindahl; David A Morrow; Peter M Clemmensen; Per Johanson; Hanoch Hod; Richard Underwood; Jeroen J Bax; Robert O Bonow; Fausto Pinto; Raymond J Gibbons; Keith A Fox; Dan Atar; L Kristin Newby; Marcello Galvani; Christian W Hamm; Barry F Uretsky; Ph Gabriel Steg; William Wijns; Jean-Pierre Bassand; Phillippe Menasché; Jan Ravkilde; E Magnus Ohman; Elliott M Antman; Lars C Wallentin; Paul W Armstrong; Maarten L Simoons; James L Januzzi; Markku S Nieminen; Mihai Gheorghiade; Gerasimos Filippatos; Russell V Luepker; Stephen P Fortmann; Wayne D Rosamond; Dan Levy; David Wood; Sidney C Smith; Dayi Hu; José-Luis Lopez-Sendon; Rose Marie Robertson; Douglas Weaver; Michal Tendera; Alfred A Bove; Alexander N Parkhomenko; Elena J Vasilieva; Shanti Mendis
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Dedicated bifurcation paclitaxel-eluting stent BiOSS Expert® in the treatment of distal left main stem stenosis.

Authors:  Jacek Bil; Robert J Gil; Dobrin Vassilev; Jarosław Rzezak; Tomasz Kulawik; Tomasz Pawlowski
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2014-04-07       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Regular Drug-Eluting Stent vs Dedicated Coronary Bifurcation BiOSS Expert Stent: Multicenter Open-Label Randomized Controlled POLBOS I Trial.

Authors:  Robert J Gil; Jacek Bil; Vladimír Džavík; Dobrin Vassilev; Adam Kern; Radoslaw Formuszewicz; Małgorzata Zalewska-Adamiec; Sławomir Dobrzycki
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2014-12-24       Impact factor: 5.223

5.  Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis: classification and implications for long-term outcome.

Authors:  R Mehran; G Dangas; A S Abizaid; G S Mintz; A J Lansky; L F Satler; A D Pichard; K M Kent; G W Stone; M B Leon
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1999-11-02       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 6.  Percutaneous coronary intervention for the left main stem and other bifurcation lesions: 12th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club.

Authors:  Jens Flensted Lassen; Francesco Burzotta; Adrian P Banning; Thierry Lefèvre; Olivier Darremont; David Hildick-Smith; Alaide Chieffo; Manuel Pan; Niels Ramsing Holm; Yves Louvard; Goran Stankovic
Journal:  EuroIntervention       Date:  2018-01-20       Impact factor: 6.534

7.  Long-term results (three to five years) of the Restenosis Intrastent: Balloon angioplasty versus elective Stenting (RIBS) randomized study.

Authors:  Fernando Alfonso; José M Augé; Javier Zueco; Armando Bethencourt; José R López-Mínguez; José M Hernández; Juan A Bullones; Isabel Calvo; Enrique Esplugas; María J Pérez-Vizcayno; Raul Moreno; Cristina Fernández; Rosana Hernández; Vasco Gama-Ribeiro
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Regular drug-eluting stents versus the dedicated coronary bifurcation sirolimus-eluting BiOSS LIM® stent: the randomised, multicentre, open-label, controlled POLBOS II trial.

Authors:  Robert J Gil; Jacek Bil; Maik J Grundeken; Adam Kern; Luis A Iñigo Garcia; Dobrin Vassilev; Tomasz Pawłowski; Radoslaw Formuszewicz; Sławomir Dobrzycki; Joanna J Wykrzykowska; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  EuroIntervention       Date:  2016-12-10       Impact factor: 6.534

9.  Twelve months clinical outcome after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in patients with stable angina and acute coronary syndrome. Data from the Polish National Registry.

Authors:  Łukasz Rzeszutko; Zbigniew Siudak; Tomasz Tokarek; Krzysztof Plens; Adrian Włodarczak; Andrzej Lekston; Andrzej Ochała; Robert J Gil; Wojciech Balak; Dariusz Dudek
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 1.426

Review 10.  Diagnosis and management challenges of in-stent restenosis in coronary arteries.

Authors:  M Chadi Alraies; Fahed Darmoch; Ramyashree Tummala; Ron Waksman
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2017-08-26
View more
  2 in total

1.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Treating In-Stent Restenosis in Unprotected-Left Main: LM-DRAGON-Registry.

Authors:  Wojciech Wańha; Jacek Bil; Michalina Kołodziejczak; Adam Kowalówka; Mariusz Kowalewski; Damian Hudziak; Radosław Gocoł; Rafał Januszek; Tomasz Figatowski; Marek Milewski; Brunon Tomasiewicz; Piotr Kübler; Bruno Hrymniak; Piotr Desperak; Łukasz Kuźma; Krzysztof Milewski; Bartłomiej Góra; Andrzej Łoś; Jan Kulczycki; Adrian Włodarczak; Wojciech Skorupski; Marek Grygier; Maciej Lesiak; Fabrizio D'Ascenzo; Marek Andres; Paweł Kleczynski; Radosław Litwinowicz; Andrea Borin; Grzegorz Smolka; Krzysztof Reczuch; Marcin Gruchała; Robert J Gil; Miłosz Jaguszewski; Krzysztof Bartuś; Piotr Suwalski; Sławomir Dobrzycki; Dariusz Dudek; Stanisław Bartuś; Mariusz Ga Sior; Andrzej Ochała; Alexandra J Lansky; Marek Deja; Jacek Legutko; Elvin Kedhi; Wojciech Wojakowski
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-04-29

2.  Angiographic Restenosis in Coronary Bifurcations Treatment with Regular Drug Eluting Stents and Dedicated Bifurcation Drug-Eluting BiOSS Stents: Analysis Based on Randomized POLBOS I and POLBOS II Studies.

Authors:  Robert J Gil; Jacek Bil; Adam Kern; Luis A Iñigo-Garcia; Radoslaw Formuszewicz; Slawomir Dobrzycki; Dobrin Vassilev; Roxana Mehran
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ther       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 3.023

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.