Journal of cardiology · 2014
Two-year vessel healing after everolimus-eluting stent implantation: serial assessment by optical coherence tomography.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Taniguchi Yu, Otake Hiromasa, Shinke Toshiro, Nakagawa Masayuki, Hariki Hirotoshi, Inoue Takumi, Osue Tsuyoshi, Hiranuma Noritoshi, Nishio Ryo, Kinutani Hiroto, Iwasaki Masamichi, Konishi Akihide, Kuroda Masaru, Hirata Ken-ichi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Previous reports have suggested the importance of delayed arterial healing and the development of neoatherosclerosis as major contributors to stent thrombosis and delayed restenosis. The difference of in vivo assessment of long-term vessel healing between first-generation drug-eluting stents and current generation everolimus-eluting stents (EESs) is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term arterial healing in EES in comparison with the first generation sirolimus-eluting stents (SES).
METHODS: We evaluated 31 EES (23 patients) and 8 SES (7 patients) by serial optical coherence tomography at 12 months (mid-phase) and 24 months (late-phase) after stenting and evaluated the change in neointimal thickness (NIT), the percentages of uncovered struts, peri-strut low intensity area (PLIA; region around stent struts homogenously lower-intensity appearance than surrounding tissue), and thrombus.
RESULTS: Although the average NIT showed no significant changes from the mid- to the late-phase follow-up in both EES and SES groups, the change in NIT and minimum lumen area was significantly larger in SES than EES (5.2±29.4 vs. 37.2±48.9; p=0.02, -0.06±0.36 vs. -0.45±0.74; p=0.04, respectively). The incidence of uncovered struts and struts with PLIA of EES was lower than those of SES, at both phases. Stents with in-stent thrombus of EES tended to be lower than that of SES at both phase follow-ups.
CONCLUSION: Although both SES and EES showed progressive luminal narrowing from the mid- to the late-phase follow-up, the extent of delayed lumen narrowing and delayed neointimal proliferation was significantly less in the second generation EES than the first generation SES. EESs seem to offer sustained stability in efficacy, without sacrificing safety, up to 2 years after implantation.
METHODS: We evaluated 31 EES (23 patients) and 8 SES (7 patients) by serial optical coherence tomography at 12 months (mid-phase) and 24 months (late-phase) after stenting and evaluated the change in neointimal thickness (NIT), the percentages of uncovered struts, peri-strut low intensity area (PLIA; region around stent struts homogenously lower-intensity appearance than surrounding tissue), and thrombus.
RESULTS: Although the average NIT showed no significant changes from the mid- to the late-phase follow-up in both EES and SES groups, the change in NIT and minimum lumen area was significantly larger in SES than EES (5.2±29.4 vs. 37.2±48.9; p=0.02, -0.06±0.36 vs. -0.45±0.74; p=0.04, respectively). The incidence of uncovered struts and struts with PLIA of EES was lower than those of SES, at both phases. Stents with in-stent thrombus of EES tended to be lower than that of SES at both phase follow-ups.
CONCLUSION: Although both SES and EES showed progressive luminal narrowing from the mid- to the late-phase follow-up, the extent of delayed lumen narrowing and delayed neointimal proliferation was significantly less in the second generation EES than the first generation SES. EESs seem to offer sustained stability in efficacy, without sacrificing safety, up to 2 years after implantation.