TY - JOUR
T1 - Trends and Outcomes of Restenosis After Coronary Stent Implantation in the United States
AU - Moussa, Issam D.
AU - Mohananey, Divyanshu
AU - Saucedo, Jorge
AU - Stone, Gregg W.
AU - Yeh, Robert W.
AU - Kennedy, Kevin F.
AU - Waksman, Ron
AU - Teirstein, Paul
AU - Moses, Jeffrey W.
AU - Simonton, Chuck
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was funded by the CathPCI NCDR Registry, Washington, DC, and Abbott Vascular, Inc., Santa Clara, California. Dr. Moussa has served as Speaker for Abbott Vascular, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Yeh has received research grants and consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr. Stone has received speaker fees and other honoraria from Cook, Terumo, Qool Therapeutics, and Orchestra Biomed; has served as a consultant to Valfix, TherOx, Vascular Dynamics, Robocath, HeartFlow, Gore, Ablative Solutions, Miracor, Neovasc, V-Wave, Abiomed, Ancora, MAIA Pharmaceuticals, Vectorious, Reva, and Matrizyme; and has received equity/options from Ancora, Qool Therapeutics, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, MedFocus family of funds, and Valfix. Dr. Waksman has served on advisory boards for Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, and Pi-Cardia Ltd.; has served as a consultant for Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, and Pi-Cardia Ltd; has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Chiesi; has served on speaker bureaus for AstraZeneca and Chiesi; and is an investor in MedAlliance. Dr. Teirstein has served as a consultant for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Simonton is an employee of AbioMed, Inc.; and is a stockholder and pension recipient of Abbott Labs. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, MPH, served as Guest Editor-in-Chief for this paper.
Funding Information:
This work was funded by the CathPCI NCDR Registry, Washington, DC, and Abbott Vascular, Inc., Santa Clara, California. Dr. Moussa has served as Speaker for Abbott Vascular, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Yeh has received research grants and consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr. Stone has received speaker fees and other honoraria from Cook, Terumo, Qool Therapeutics, and Orchestra Biomed; has served as a consultant to Valfix, TherOx, Vascular Dynamics, Robocath, HeartFlow, Gore, Ablative Solutions, Miracor, Neovasc, V-Wave, Abiomed, Ancora, MAIA Pharmaceuticals, Vectorious, Reva, and Matrizyme; and has received equity/options from Ancora, Qool Therapeutics, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, MedFocus family of funds, and Valfix. Dr. Waksman has served on advisory boards for Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, and Pi-Cardia Ltd.; has served as a consultant for Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, and Pi-Cardia Ltd; has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Chiesi; has served on speaker bureaus for AstraZeneca and Chiesi; and is an investor in MedAlliance. Dr. Teirstein has served as a consultant for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Simonton is an employee of AbioMed, Inc.; and is a stockholder and pension recipient of Abbott Labs. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, MPH, served as Guest Editor-in-Chief for this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation
PY - 2020/9/29
Y1 - 2020/9/29
N2 - Background: There is a paucity of data on the burden of in-stent restenosis (ISR) in the United States as well as on its presentation and appropriate treatment strategies. Objectives: This study aims to provide an analysis of the temporal trends, clinical presentation, treatment strategies, and in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ISR in the United States. Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of data collected in the Diagnostic Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (CathPCI) registry of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) between 2009 and 2017. Of the total patients undergoing PCI, we identified those undergoing PCI for ISR lesions. For comparison of in-hospital outcomes, propensity-score matching was employed. Results: Among the 5,100,394 patients undergoing PCI, 10.6% of patients underwent PCI for ISR lesions. Patients with bare-metal stent ISR declined from 2.6% in 2009 Q3 to 0.9% in 2017 Q2 (p < 0.001), and drug-eluting stent ISR rose from 5.4% in 2009 Q3 to 6.3% in 2017 Q2 (p < 0.001). Patients with ISR PCI were less likely to present with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (18.7% vs. 22.5%; p < 0.001) or ST-segment elevation MI (8.5% vs. 15.7%; p < 0.001). In the propensity-matched population of patients, there were no significant differences between patients with ISR and non-ISR PCI for in-hospital complications and hospital length of stay. Conclusions: ISR represents approximately 10% of all PCI and is treated most commonly with another stent. Approximately 25% of patients present with acute MI. In-hospital outcomes of patients with ISR PCI are comparable with those undergoing non-ISR PCI.
AB - Background: There is a paucity of data on the burden of in-stent restenosis (ISR) in the United States as well as on its presentation and appropriate treatment strategies. Objectives: This study aims to provide an analysis of the temporal trends, clinical presentation, treatment strategies, and in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ISR in the United States. Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of data collected in the Diagnostic Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (CathPCI) registry of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) between 2009 and 2017. Of the total patients undergoing PCI, we identified those undergoing PCI for ISR lesions. For comparison of in-hospital outcomes, propensity-score matching was employed. Results: Among the 5,100,394 patients undergoing PCI, 10.6% of patients underwent PCI for ISR lesions. Patients with bare-metal stent ISR declined from 2.6% in 2009 Q3 to 0.9% in 2017 Q2 (p < 0.001), and drug-eluting stent ISR rose from 5.4% in 2009 Q3 to 6.3% in 2017 Q2 (p < 0.001). Patients with ISR PCI were less likely to present with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (18.7% vs. 22.5%; p < 0.001) or ST-segment elevation MI (8.5% vs. 15.7%; p < 0.001). In the propensity-matched population of patients, there were no significant differences between patients with ISR and non-ISR PCI for in-hospital complications and hospital length of stay. Conclusions: ISR represents approximately 10% of all PCI and is treated most commonly with another stent. Approximately 25% of patients present with acute MI. In-hospital outcomes of patients with ISR PCI are comparable with those undergoing non-ISR PCI.
KW - angioplasty
KW - in-stent restenosis
KW - myocardial infarction
KW - percutaneous coronary intervention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090718760&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85090718760&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.08.002
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.08.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 32972528
AN - SCOPUS:85090718760
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 76
SP - 1521
EP - 1531
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 13
ER -