Giacoppo Daniele, Mazzone Placido Maria, Capodanno Davide
Division of Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico "Rodolico-San Marco", Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, via Santa Sofia 78, 95124 Catania, Italy.
J Clin Med. 2024 Apr 19;13(8):2377. doi: 10.3390/jcm13082377.
In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the primary cause of target lesion failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), resulting in 10-year incidences of target lesion revascularization at a rate of approximately 20%. The treatment of ISR is challenging due to its inherent propensity for recurrence and varying susceptibility to available strategies, influenced by a complex interplay between clinical and lesion-specific conditions. Given the multiple mechanisms contributing to the development of ISR, proper identification of the underlying substrate, especially by using intravascular imaging, becomes pivotal as it can indicate distinct therapeutic requirements. Among standalone treatments, drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been the most effective. The main advantage of a DCB-based approach is the avoidance of an additional metallic layer, which may otherwise enhance neointimal hyperplasia, provide the substratum for developing neoatherosclerosis, and expose the patient to a persistently higher risk of coronary ischemic events. On the other hand, target vessel scaffolding by DES implantation confers relevant mechanical advantages over DCB angioplasty, generally resulting in larger luminal gain, while drug elution from the stent surface ensures the inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. Nevertheless, repeat stenting with DES also implies an additional permanent metallic layer that may reiterate and promote the mechanisms leading to ISR. Against this background, the selection of either DCB or DES on a patient- and lesion-specific basis as well as the implementation of adjuvant treatments, including cutting/scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy, and rotational atherectomy, hold the potential to improve the effectiveness of ISR treatment over time. In this review, we comprehensively assessed the available evidence from randomized trials to define contemporary interventional treatment of ISR and provide insights for future directions.
支架内再狭窄(ISR)仍然是经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后靶病变失败的主要原因,导致靶病变血运重建的10年发生率约为20%。ISR的治疗具有挑战性,因为其本身具有复发倾向,且对现有治疗策略的敏感性各不相同,这受到临床和病变特异性条件之间复杂相互作用的影响。鉴于促成ISR发生的机制众多,正确识别潜在的病理基础,尤其是通过血管内成像来识别,变得至关重要,因为它可以指明不同的治疗需求。在单一治疗方法中,药物涂层球囊(DCB)血管成形术和药物洗脱支架(DES)植入术最为有效。基于DCB的治疗方法的主要优点是避免了额外的金属层,否则这可能会加剧内膜增生,为新动脉粥样硬化的发展提供基质,并使患者持续面临更高的冠状动脉缺血事件风险。另一方面,通过DES植入进行靶血管支架置入比DCB血管成形术具有相关的机械优势,通常会带来更大的管腔增益,同时支架表面的药物洗脱可确保抑制内膜增生。然而,再次使用DES进行支架置入也意味着额外的永久性金属层,这可能会再次引发并促进导致ISR的机制。在此背景下,根据患者和病变的具体情况选择DCB或DES,以及实施辅助治疗,包括切割/刻痕球囊、血管内碎石术和旋磨术,有可能随着时间的推移提高ISR治疗的有效性。在这篇综述中,我们全面评估了随机试验的现有证据,以确定ISR的当代介入治疗方法,并为未来的研究方向提供见解。
J Clin Med. 2024-4-19
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2024-1-8
J Interv Cardiol. 2018-12
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020-1-9
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025-1-31
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023-3-30
JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2024-3-13
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2024
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2023-11-1
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2024-1-23