| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on May 3, 2002
From the Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Boston, Mass (R.P., R.E.K.); Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, Calif (P.S.T., J.P.R., P.T., S.J.); Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY (J.W.M., A.J.L., M.B.L.); Cordis, a Johnson and Johnson Company, Warren, NJ (J.-A.G.); Cornell-New York Hospital, New York, NY (S.C.W.); Texas Heart Institute/St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (R.D.F.); Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (S.E.); Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (D.R.H.); and Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio (D.K.). * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: rprpic{at}hcri.harvard.edu.
BackgroundAlthough 192Ir intracoronary brachytherapy has been demonstrated to dramatically reduce the recurrence of in-stent restenosis, up to 24% of these patients will still require repeat target-vessel revascularization. The short- and long-term outcomes of repeat percutaneous intervention in this population have not been characterized. Methods and ResultsAnalysis was performed of all patients enrolled in the GAMMA-I and GAMMA-II brachytherapy trials who underwent repeat percutaneous target lesion revascularization (TLR) because of restenosis. Subjects were divided into 2 cohorts: those who had received 192Ir brachytherapy and those randomized to placebo. Forty-five (17.6%) of a total of 256 patients whose index treatment was intracoronary radiation therapy and 36 (29.8%) of 121 patients whose index treatment was placebo required repeat percutaneous TLR. The mean time to this first TLR was 295±206 days in the irradiated group and 202±167 days in the placebo group (P=0.03). Acute procedural success occurred in 100% of irradiated patients and 94% of placebo controls (P=0.19). After the first TLR, a subsequent TLR was required in 15 (33.3%) of 45 brachytherapy patients versus 17 (47.2%) of 36 placebo failure patients (P=0.26). There was no significant difference in time to second TLR between the 2 groups. Other long-term major adverse event rates in both groups were comparable to those of other contemporary angioplasty/stenting series. ConclusionsIn those patients who "fail" 192Ir intracoronary brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis, treatment with 192Ir delays the time to first TLR. Additionally, repeat percutaneous intervention in these patients is safe and efficacious in the short term, with acceptable long-term results.
Revised on July 29, 2002
Accepted on August 21, 2002
Long-Term Outcome of Patients Treated With Repeat Percutaneous Coronary Intervention After Failure of
Ross Prpic MBBS*,
-Brachytherapy for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E Iofina, P W Radke, P Skurzewski, P K Haager, R Blindt, K-C Koch, P Hanrath, J vom Dahl, and R Hoffmann Superiority of sirolimus eluting stent compared with intracoronary {beta} radiation for treatment of in-stent restenosis: a matched comparison Heart, December 1, 2005; 91(12): 1584 - 1589. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Waksman, R. Lew, A. E. Ajani, A. D. Pichard, L. F. Satler, K. M. Kent, R. Chan, R. L. White, W. O. Suddath, E. Pinnow, et al. Repeat Intracoronary Radiation for Recurrent In-Stent Restenosis in Patients Who Failed Intracoronary Radiation Circulation, August 12, 2003; 108(6): 654 - 656. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Q. Almeda and G. L. Schaer Mechanisms behind intracoronary radiation therapy failure J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 16, 2003; 42(2): 395 - 396. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2002 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |