Delayed coverage in malapposed and side-branch struts with respect to well-apposed struts in drug-eluting stents: in vivo assessment with optical coherence tomography

Gutiérrez-Chico, Juan Luis; Regar, Evelyn; Nüesch, Eveline; Okamura, Takayuki; Wykrzykowska, Joanna; di Mario, Carlo; Windecker, Stephan; van Es, Gerrit-Anne; Gobbens, Pierre; Jüni, Peter; Serruys, Patrick W (2011). Delayed coverage in malapposed and side-branch struts with respect to well-apposed struts in drug-eluting stents: in vivo assessment with optical coherence tomography. Circulation, 124(5), pp. 612-623. Baltimore, Md.: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.014514

Text Gutiérrez-Chico Circulation 2011.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (10MB) | Request a copy

Background—Pathology studies on fatal cases of very late stent thrombosis have described incomplete neointimal coverage as common substrate, in some cases appearing at side-branch struts. Intravascular ultrasound studies have described the association between incomplete stent apposition (ISA) and stent thrombosis, but the mechanism explaining this association remains unclear. Whether the neointimal coverage of nonapposed side-branch and ISA struts is delayed with respect to well-apposed struts is unknown.

Methods and Results—Optical coherence tomography studies from 178 stents implanted in 99 patients from 2 randomized trials were analyzed at 9 to 13 months of follow-up. The sample included 38 sirolimus-eluting, 33 biolimus-eluting, 57 everolimus-eluting, and 50 zotarolimus-eluting stents. Optical coherence tomography coverage of nonapposed side-branch and ISA struts was compared with well-apposed struts of the same stent by statistical pooled analysis with a random-effects model. A total of 34 120 struts were analyzed. The risk ratio of delayed coverage was 9.00 (95% confidence interval, 6.58 to 12.32) for nonapposed side-branch versus well-apposed struts, 9.10 (95% confidence interval, 7.34 to 11.28) for ISA versus well-apposed struts, and 1.73 (95% confidence interval, 1.34 to 2.23) for ISA versus nonapposed side-branch struts. Heterogeneity of the effect was observed in the comparison of ISA versus well-apposed struts (H=1.27; I2=38.40) but not in the other comparisons.

Conclusions—Coverage of ISA and nonapposed side-branch struts is delayed with respect to well-apposed struts in drug-eluting stents, as assessed by optical coherence tomography.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

2 since deposited on 04 Oct 2013
0 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item