Usefulness of gamma intracoronary radiation for totally occluded in-stent restenotic coronary narrowing

Brachytherapy for restenosis after stenting for coronary artery disease: its role in the drug-eluting stent era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent years have brought remarkable changes to the field of interventional cardiology. The need for repeat intervention due to restenosis, the most vexing long-term failure of percutaneous coronary intervention, has been significantly reduced owing to the introduction of two major advances, the vascular brachytherapy (VBT) and the drug-eluting stents (DES).

RECENT FINDINGS

Vascular brachytherapy has demonstrated its efficacy in limiting recurrence of existing in-stent restenosis. The past 2 years have sealed its reputation, with a variety of studies demonstrating its superiority over conventional therapy in challenging patient subsets with high risk for restenosis recurrence. Moreover, the long-term follow-up confirmed durability of this therapy, and the failures of VBT were characterized as easy to treat. Conversely, DES have shown spectacular efficacy at primarily preventing the first restenosis episode following the initial stent placement. Consequently, the role of VBT may be minimized, as the overall need for repeat revascularization is diminished as a result of the wide acceptance of DES. Furthermore, if the capacity of DES to treat in-stent restenosis is confirmed in randomized trials, they may eventually supersede VBT as the therapy of choice for in-stent restenosis.

SUMMARY

At present, VBT is the proven and durable therapeutic choice for patients with complex, diffuse in-stent restenosis who would otherwise have a very poor prognosis for long-term event-free survival. DES have emerged as remarkably effective in minimizing the first restenosis occurrence; they also represent a promising and competitive alternative to VBT for the treatment of in-stent restenosis.

Intracoronary Brachytherapy for Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated that intracoronary brachytherapy is more efficacious than placebo in reducing death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at long-term follow up of patients with in-stent restenosis. Intracoronary brachytherapy is efficacious in treating totally occluded in-stent restenotic lesions, in treating de novo and in-stent restenotic lesions in saphenous vein grafts, in treating diffuse in-stent restenosis, in treating native coronary ostial in-stent restenotic lesions, in treating patients with diabetes with in-stent restenosis, in treating patients at high-risk for recurrence of restenosis, in treating elderly patients, and in treating patients who failed intracoronary radiation. Beta and gamma intracoronary brachytherapy are equally effective in treating in-stent restenosis. Long-term aspirin and clopidogrel should be administered for at least 1 year to reduce late vessel thrombosis. Inadequate radiation may cause edge stenosis.

Long-term clinical and angiographic outcome of patients with occlusive in-stent restenosis treated with (32P) beta-brachytherapy

The objective of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of (32)P beta-brachytherapy in totally occlusive in-stent restenosis (ISR). Patients with occlusive ISR were generally excluded from the randomized clinical trials on intracoronary brachytherapy (utilizing either gamma- or beta-sources) that have shown reductions in restenosis rate and need for revascularization procedures. We analyzed short- and long-term effects of (32)P beta-brachytherapy (20 Gy) in 27 patients (28 lesions) with occlusive ISR and 84 (99 lesions) patients with nonocclusive high-risk ISR. The primary outcome measure was frequency of in-lesion angiographic binary restenosis at 7 months. Secondary endpoints were rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target vessel revascularization (TVR), clinically driven TVR, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). (32)P beta-brachytherapy was feasible and safe and provided similar postprocedural angiographic results in the two clinically comparable groups. However, the 7-month binary restenosis rate was higher in the occlusive group, as were the MACE and late total occlusion rates. Multivariate logistic analysis of the overall population indicated occlusive pattern to be the only independent predictor of angiographic restenosis. In both groups, recurrent lesions most often showed a focal pattern with significant reduction of length. Although safe and effective in high-risk ISR, (32)P brachytherapy at 20 Gy does not appear to be sufficient to avoid long-term restenosis in patients with occlusive lesions. Further studies should determine the most suitable source and dosage of brachytherapy for patients with occlusive ISR.

Predictors of 32P beta brachytherapy failure in patients with high-risk in-stent restenosis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of coronary radiation therapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) has been established in several randomized clinical trials. The efficacy of this treatment in the general population is less well established.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We report our experience in 118 consecutive patients with nonselected high-risk ISR who had undergone successful percutaneous coronary intervention and brachytherapy with (32)P beta-irradiation and who were prospectively enrolled in a quantitative angiographic and clinical follow-up protocol at 7 months after the index procedure. The aim of this study was to investigate the independent predictor of angiographic restenosis after (32)P brachytherapy treatment.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 28.8% were diabetics. The mean lesion and mean radiated lengths were, respectively, 30.1 +/- 17.2 and 43.8 +/- 16.9 mm. The ISR pattern was diffuse in 96% of the treated lesions; in particular, 22.1% presented an occlusive pattern and 37.1% a proliferative pattern. At follow-up angiographic, restenosis and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates were, respectively, 20.8% and 29.6%. The univariate predictors of angiographic restenosis were procedural geographic miss, pattern IV ISR, manual pullback maneuver of the radiation source, preprocedural lesion percentage stenosis and preprocedural lesion MLD. At logistic regression analysis, only geographic miss and pattern IV ISR were independent predictors of post intracoronary radiation therapy (IRT) angiographic restenosis.

CONCLUSION

These data indicate that 7-month angiographic restenosis after (32)P IRT in complex patients with ISR is not a frequent event and is predicted mainly by an occlusive lesion at baseline and by procedural geographical miss.