A comparison of procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes between in-stent restenosis chronic total occlusion and de novo chronic total occlusion using multicenter registry data

Seung Hun Lee, Jae Young Cho, Je Sang Kim, Hyun Jong Lee, Jeong Hoon Yang, Jae Hyoung Park, Soon Jun Hong, Rak Kyeong Choi, Seung Hyuk Choi, Hyeon Cheol Gwon, Do Sun Lim, Cheol Woong Yu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: There have been little data about outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the drug eluting stent (DES) era. This study aimed to compare the procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes of ISR CTO and de novo CTO. Methods and results: Patients who underwent PCI for ISR CTO (n = 164) versus de novo CTO (n = 1208) were enrolled from three centers in Korea between January 2008 and December 2014. Among a total of ISR CTO, a proportion of DES ISR CTO was 79.3% (n = 130). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs); a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Following propensity score-matching (1:3), the ISR CTO group (n = 156) had a higher success rate (84.6% vs. 76.0%, p = 0.035), mainly driven by high success rate of PCI for DES ISR CTO (88.6%), but showed a higher incidence of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR): 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37–3.09; p < 0.001], mainly driven by higher prevalence of MI [HR: 9.71; 95% CI 2.06–45.81; p = 0.004] and TLR [HR: 3.04; 95% CI 1.59–5.81; p = 0.001], during 5 years of follow-up after successful revascularization, as compared to the de novo CTO group (n = 408). Conclusion: The procedural success rate was higher in the ISR CTO than the de novo CTO, especially in DES ISR CTO. However, irrespective of successful revascularization, the long-term clinical outcomes for the ISR CTO were significantly worse than those for the de novo CTO, in terms of MI and TLR. Graphic abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].

Original languageEnglish
JournalClinical Research in Cardiology
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2019 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Stents
Registries
Drug-Eluting Stents
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Myocardial Infarction
Confidence Intervals
Propensity Score
Korea
Cause of Death
Incidence

Keywords

  • Chronic coronary total occlusion
  • In-stent restenosis
  • Percutaneous coronary interventions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

A comparison of procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes between in-stent restenosis chronic total occlusion and de novo chronic total occlusion using multicenter registry data. / Lee, Seung Hun; Cho, Jae Young; Kim, Je Sang; Lee, Hyun Jong; Yang, Jeong Hoon; Park, Jae Hyoung; Hong, Soon Jun; Choi, Rak Kyeong; Choi, Seung Hyuk; Gwon, Hyeon Cheol; Lim, Do Sun; Yu, Cheol Woong.

In: Clinical Research in Cardiology, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c5e978b9e2524f6292bb9a403ecedab4,
title = "A comparison of procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes between in-stent restenosis chronic total occlusion and de novo chronic total occlusion using multicenter registry data",
abstract = "Background: There have been little data about outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the drug eluting stent (DES) era. This study aimed to compare the procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes of ISR CTO and de novo CTO. Methods and results: Patients who underwent PCI for ISR CTO (n = 164) versus de novo CTO (n = 1208) were enrolled from three centers in Korea between January 2008 and December 2014. Among a total of ISR CTO, a proportion of DES ISR CTO was 79.3{\%} (n = 130). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs); a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Following propensity score-matching (1:3), the ISR CTO group (n = 156) had a higher success rate (84.6{\%} vs. 76.0{\%}, p = 0.035), mainly driven by high success rate of PCI for DES ISR CTO (88.6{\%}), but showed a higher incidence of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR): 2.06; 95{\%} confidence interval (CI) 1.37–3.09; p < 0.001], mainly driven by higher prevalence of MI [HR: 9.71; 95{\%} CI 2.06–45.81; p = 0.004] and TLR [HR: 3.04; 95{\%} CI 1.59–5.81; p = 0.001], during 5 years of follow-up after successful revascularization, as compared to the de novo CTO group (n = 408). Conclusion: The procedural success rate was higher in the ISR CTO than the de novo CTO, especially in DES ISR CTO. However, irrespective of successful revascularization, the long-term clinical outcomes for the ISR CTO were significantly worse than those for the de novo CTO, in terms of MI and TLR. Graphic abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].",
keywords = "Chronic coronary total occlusion, In-stent restenosis, Percutaneous coronary interventions",
author = "Lee, {Seung Hun} and Cho, {Jae Young} and Kim, {Je Sang} and Lee, {Hyun Jong} and Yang, {Jeong Hoon} and Park, {Jae Hyoung} and Hong, {Soon Jun} and Choi, {Rak Kyeong} and Choi, {Seung Hyuk} and Gwon, {Hyeon Cheol} and Lim, {Do Sun} and Yu, {Cheol Woong}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00392-019-01550-7",
language = "English",
journal = "Clinical Research in Cardiology",
issn = "1861-0684",
publisher = "D. Steinkopff-Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes between in-stent restenosis chronic total occlusion and de novo chronic total occlusion using multicenter registry data

AU - Lee, Seung Hun

AU - Cho, Jae Young

AU - Kim, Je Sang

AU - Lee, Hyun Jong

AU - Yang, Jeong Hoon

AU - Park, Jae Hyoung

AU - Hong, Soon Jun

AU - Choi, Rak Kyeong

AU - Choi, Seung Hyuk

AU - Gwon, Hyeon Cheol

AU - Lim, Do Sun

AU - Yu, Cheol Woong

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: There have been little data about outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the drug eluting stent (DES) era. This study aimed to compare the procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes of ISR CTO and de novo CTO. Methods and results: Patients who underwent PCI for ISR CTO (n = 164) versus de novo CTO (n = 1208) were enrolled from three centers in Korea between January 2008 and December 2014. Among a total of ISR CTO, a proportion of DES ISR CTO was 79.3% (n = 130). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs); a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Following propensity score-matching (1:3), the ISR CTO group (n = 156) had a higher success rate (84.6% vs. 76.0%, p = 0.035), mainly driven by high success rate of PCI for DES ISR CTO (88.6%), but showed a higher incidence of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR): 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37–3.09; p < 0.001], mainly driven by higher prevalence of MI [HR: 9.71; 95% CI 2.06–45.81; p = 0.004] and TLR [HR: 3.04; 95% CI 1.59–5.81; p = 0.001], during 5 years of follow-up after successful revascularization, as compared to the de novo CTO group (n = 408). Conclusion: The procedural success rate was higher in the ISR CTO than the de novo CTO, especially in DES ISR CTO. However, irrespective of successful revascularization, the long-term clinical outcomes for the ISR CTO were significantly worse than those for the de novo CTO, in terms of MI and TLR. Graphic abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].

AB - Background: There have been little data about outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the drug eluting stent (DES) era. This study aimed to compare the procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes of ISR CTO and de novo CTO. Methods and results: Patients who underwent PCI for ISR CTO (n = 164) versus de novo CTO (n = 1208) were enrolled from three centers in Korea between January 2008 and December 2014. Among a total of ISR CTO, a proportion of DES ISR CTO was 79.3% (n = 130). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs); a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Following propensity score-matching (1:3), the ISR CTO group (n = 156) had a higher success rate (84.6% vs. 76.0%, p = 0.035), mainly driven by high success rate of PCI for DES ISR CTO (88.6%), but showed a higher incidence of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR): 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37–3.09; p < 0.001], mainly driven by higher prevalence of MI [HR: 9.71; 95% CI 2.06–45.81; p = 0.004] and TLR [HR: 3.04; 95% CI 1.59–5.81; p = 0.001], during 5 years of follow-up after successful revascularization, as compared to the de novo CTO group (n = 408). Conclusion: The procedural success rate was higher in the ISR CTO than the de novo CTO, especially in DES ISR CTO. However, irrespective of successful revascularization, the long-term clinical outcomes for the ISR CTO were significantly worse than those for the de novo CTO, in terms of MI and TLR. Graphic abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].

KW - Chronic coronary total occlusion

KW - In-stent restenosis

KW - Percutaneous coronary interventions

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073928017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073928017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00392-019-01550-7

DO - 10.1007/s00392-019-01550-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 31552494

AN - SCOPUS:85073928017

JO - Clinical Research in Cardiology

JF - Clinical Research in Cardiology

SN - 1861-0684

ER -