ABC stenosis morphology classification and outcome of coronary angioplasty: reassessment with computing techniques

Value of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association angiographic classification of coronary lesion morphology in patients with in-stent restenosis. Insights from the Restenosis Intra-stent Balloon angioplasty versus elective Stenting (RIBS) randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The implications of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) lesion classification in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) are unknown.

METHODS

Four hundred fifty patients included in the RIBS randomized study were analyzed. A centralized core laboratory assessed ISR classifications including ACC/AHA, the classification of Mehran et al (Circulation 1999;100:1872-8), diffuse/focal, and a new quantitative ISR index (lesion length/stent length). Logistic regression models were constructed for prespecified outcome measures including (1) unsatisfactory acute results and (2) recurrent restenosis rate.

RESULTS

Complex (B2/C) lesions (78%) more frequently obtained unsatisfactory acute results (20% vs 8%, P = .007), smaller minimal lumen diameter after the procedure (2.45 +/- 0.5 vs 2.73 +/- 0.5 mm, P = .001) and at follow-up (1.48 +/- 0.8 vs 1.94 +/- 0.8 mm, P = .0001), and had a higher restenosis rate (43 vs 24%, P = .001) than simple (A/B1) lesions. On logistic regression analysis, all classification schemes were useful to predict unsatisfactory initial results (area under the curve: 0.63, 0.61, 0.59, and 0.62) and recurrent restenosis (area under the curve: 0.60, 0.64, 0.61, and 0.63). The predictive ability of these schemes persisted despite adjustment for potential confounders. Although the ACC/AHA classification was a better predictor of acute results, the classification of Mehran was superior to predict restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACC/AHA classification provides a useful tool to determine acute procedural results and the long-term angiographic outcome of patients with ISR.

Endothelial microparticles correlate with high-risk angiographic lesions in acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Endothelial Microparticles (EMP) are small fragments of endothelial cell membrane shed during apoptosis or activation. Our group has previously reported elevations of EMP in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), pre-eclampsia, multiple sclerosis (MS), and severe hypertension (HTN). In the present study, we evaluate the possible relationship between EMP levels and the angiographic severity and characteristics of coronary obstructive lesions.

METHODS

We studied a total of 43 patients undergoing coronary angiography. Fifteen had presented with acute myocardial infarction (MI), 20 with unstable anginas (UA), 5 with stable angina (SA) and 3 with congestive heart failure. Coronary angiography was reviewed and coronary lesions were classified using the Ambrose classification. Coronary stenoses were classified as high and low risk. High-risk included lesions with eccentric appearance (type II), presence of thrombi, or multiple irregularities. Low-risk lesions were defined as concentric or type I. Lesions were also analyzed by degree of stenosis and history of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). EMP in plasma was assayed by flow cytometry.

RESULTS

EMP in eccentric type II or multiple irregular lesions (high-risk) were 2.5-fold higher than in type I or concentric (low-risk) lesions, p<0.05. Lesions with thrombi had three-fold higher EMP than those without (p=0.05). Mild stenosis (>20%-<45%) had three-fold higher EMP than more severe (>45%), and five-fold higher than those without stenosis (p<0.01). Among patients with type II lesions, those with first ACS episode had four-fold higher EMP levels than those with recurrent ACS (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

High EMP was associated with high-risk angiographic lesions including eccentric type II, multiple irregular, and lesions with thrombi. Mild to moderate stenosis was associated with higher EMP levels than severe stenosis. EMP may be a useful marker in detecting endothelial injury and risk of ACS as defined by angiography.

Relation of percutaneous coronary intervention of complex lesions to clinical outcomes (from the NHLBI Dynamic Registry)

Advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have reduced complications but expanded indications. We used the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Insitute Dynamic Registry to determine clinical outcomes up to 1 year after PCI in 2,839 patients with at least 1 treated complex lesion (defined as a lesion showing evidence of thrombus, calcification, bifurcation or ostial location, or chronic occlusion) and 1,790 patients with only simple lesions treated. Complex lesion interventions were associated (p <0.05) with more sustained major dissections, distal embolization, side branch occlusion, and persistent flow reduction. Patients with treated complex lesions had a lower procedural success rate (93.8% vs 97.3%, p <0.001) and increased in-hospital rates (p <0.001) of death (2.0% vs 0.6%), death/myocardial infarction [MI] (5.2% vs 2.4%), or death/MI/coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] surgery (6.5% vs 2.9%). After adjustment for potential confounders, patients treated for multiple complex lesions were more likely to experience the in-hospital combined end points of death/MI (odds ratio 3.22, 95% confidence interval 2.10 to 4.92), or death/MI/CABG (odds ratio 2.55, 95% confidence interval 1.71 to 3.80). At 1 year, patients with treated complex lesions were more likely (p <0.001) to die (6.2% vs 3.7%), suffer death/MI (11.7% vs 7.5%), or death/MI/CABG/repeat PCI (27.2% vs 23.4%). Patients treated for multiple complex lesions were approximately 50% more likely to die or to have major adverse events than with patients only treated for simple lesions. An increased in-hospital adverse clinical event rate was independently noted for thrombotic, bifurcation, and calcified lesions, and bifurcation lesions had worse long-term event rates.

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting in isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: six months' angiographic and clinical follow-up of a prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (surgical intervention) with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with primary stenting (stenting) in patients having an isolated high-grade stenosis (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification type B2 or C) of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. At 6 months, both procedures were compared on the basis of quantitative angiography and clinical outcome.

METHODS

Both treatments were compared in a single-center, prospective, randomized study. The primary end point of this study was quantitative angiographic outcome at 6 months. The secondary end point was 6-month clinical outcome. Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

From March 1997 to September 1999, patients with angina pectoris caused by an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery were randomly assigned to surgical intervention (n = 51) or stenting (n = 51). At 6 months, quantitative coronary angiography showed an anastomotic stenosis rate of 4% after surgical intervention and a restenosis rate of 29% after stenting (P <.001). Periprocedural events did not significantly differ between surgical intervention and stenting. After surgical intervention, 2 patients died; no patients died after stenting. After 6 months, no significant difference was found for major adverse cardiac or cerebral events and need for repeat target vessel revascularization. After 6 months, return of angina pectoris, physical work capacity, and use of antianginal drugs did not significantly differ between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

After 6 months, surgical intervention had a significantly better angiographic outcome than stenting in patients with an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. Clinical outcome did not significantly differ between treatments.