Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||What is the best contemporary treatment for in-stent restenosis?|
|Authors:||Barlis, Peter;Horrigan, Mark C G;Chan, Robert K;Ajani, Andrew E;Proimos, George;Schumer, Wendy A;van Gaal, William J;Rowe, Michael;Eccleston, David;Yan, Bryan B P;Mun Cheong, Yu;Oliver, Les E;Clark, David J|
|Affiliation:||Department of Cardiology, Austin Hospital, Studley Road, PO Box 5555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia|
|Citation:||Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine : Including Molecular Interventions; 6(4): 179-81|
|Abstract:||In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a challenging problem in percutaneous coronary intervention and the optimal treatment strategy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the 18 month clinical outcomes in patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) with vascular brachytherapy (VBT) for the treatment of ISR. Twenty-five consecutive patients treated with VBT were compared with 29 patients who had SES deployment for ISR. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as a combination of death from cardiac causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or repeat TVR. At 18 month follow-up, the MACE rate was significantly lower in the SES compared with the VBT group (14% vs 40%, P=.03). One patient in the VBT group developed late stent thrombosis (at 10 months) and died; there was no stent thrombosis in the SES group. This observational study, taken with other recent reports, offers further credence to the use of SES for ISR. The results of randomized comparisons with VBT are awaited with interest.|
|Internal ID Number:||16326381|
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation.instrumentation
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
Immunosuppressive Agents.therapeutic use
|Appears in Collections:||Journal articles|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.