直接冠状动脉支架置入术的前瞻性临床研究

目的　前瞻性探讨无预扩张直接冠状动脉支架置入术的即刻和长期效果。方法　 1 997年 5月～ 2 0 0 0年 1 2月共 4 6 5例冠心病患者入选该研究 ,选择性冠状动脉造影示 4 6 5处靶病变狭窄程度 6 0 %～ 99%,平均 (79± 1 0 8) %,均为单支、单处病变 ,随机分至无预扩直接支架组 (A组 )、预扩后置入支架组 (B组 )及单行经皮冠状动脉腔内成形术 (PTCA)组 (C组 )。结果　A组与B组支架置入成功率差异无显著性。PTCA组术后即刻残余狭窄明显大于两个支架组 (P <0 0 1 )。A组X线暴光时间、手术时间、造影剂及球囊导管用量均明显少于其他两组。术后所有患者心绞痛消失。随访 8～ 5 1(2 7 9± 1 5 9)个月 ,A、B、C组心绞痛复发率分别为 4 3 %、1 8 6 %及 2 9 5 %(P <0 0 5 ) ;共有 1 87例患者复查冠状动脉造影 ,示A、B、C组再狭窄率分别为 8 6 %、1 3 3 %及 2 8 6 %,无症状存活率分别为95 2 %、80 3 %及 6 8 2 %(P <0 0 1 )。结论　对选择恰当的冠状动脉病变 ,直接冠状动脉支架置入术具有较高的即刻成功率、安全性和较理想的长期效果     

冠状动脉内支架置入术治疗老年患者复杂冠状动脉病变

目的　探讨经皮冠状动脉腔内支架置入术治疗老年患者复杂性冠状动脉病变的疗效及安全性。方法对 4 5例冠心病患者施行冠状动脉内支架置入术 ,病变血管共 5 8支 ,B型病变 4 9处 ,C型病变 1 3处 ,慢性完全闭塞病变 4处 ,共置入支架 64只。置入左前降支 2 7只 ,左回旋支 1 3只 ,右冠状动脉 2 4只。De Novo支架置入 4 4只 ,Suboptimal支架置入 1 5只 ,Bail-out支架置入 3只 ,再狭窄病变支架置入 2只。结果　术后经冠状动脉造影证实疗效满意 ,支架置入成功率为 98.4 %。术前病变平均直径狭窄 (86.5± 7.8) % ,术后残余直径狭窄 (5 .1± 1 0 .3 ) %。住院期间无亚急性支架血栓形成。 1例出现假性动脉瘤 ,1例在术中及术后出现三次心室颤动 ,4例患者术后心绞痛复发 ,复查冠状动脉造影发现了 3个支架节段血管有再狭窄。结论　对于老年冠心病患者复杂冠状动脉病变 ,经皮冠状动脉内支架置入术是一种安全有效的介入性治疗技术 ,其成功率高 ,并发症发生率低     

直接冠状动脉支架置入术的临床应用

冠状动脉内支架置入术在冠心病介入治疗中应用最为广泛 ,冠状动脉内支架置入一般先对靶病变部位用球囊进行预扩张 ,然后再置入支架。近年来 ,由于支架置入技术和球囊预装支架设计的改进 ,临床医师对一些选择的病变开始试用直接支架置入术 ,在支架置入前不用球囊预先扩张冠状动脉狭窄部位〔1 ,2〕。我们对 42例患者进行了直接冠状动脉支架置入术 ,现总结报告如下。1　对象与方法选自 1 998年 7月～ 2 0 0 1年 5月在我院住院治疗的 42例冠心病患者 ,入选标准为〔1～ 3〕:①病变无钙化或轻度钙化 ;②病变长度 <2 5ｍｍ ;③血管直径≥ 2 .5ｍｍ …     

冠状动脉内直接支架术对无再流现象的影响

目的　评价冠心病患者冠状动脉 (冠脉 )内直接支架术对术后无再流的影响。方法　包括 12 7例接受冠脉内直接支架术的患者 (直接支架组 )和一般情况匹配的 12 7例球囊扩张后行冠脉支架术的患者 (常规支架组 ) ,比较两组的一般情况、冠脉造影及介入治疗即刻和临床随访结果。结果　直接支架组患者冠脉狭窄程度较轻 (82 %± 6 %和 87%± 11% ,P <0 0 5 ) ,支架置入术最终扩张压力明显增高 [(15± 5 )atm和 (12± 3)atm ,P <0 0 5 ],11例 (8 7% )支架置入后发生无血流现象 [常规支架组18例 (14 2 % ) ,P =0 17]。随访期两组严重心脏不良事件发生率差异无显著性 ;但无血流组患者严重心脏不良事件发生率显著增高 (4 8%和 8% ,P =0 0 0 1)。结论　冠脉内直接支架或常规支架术对术后无血流现象发生的影响差异无显著性 ;初次冠脉支架术后发生无血流现象患者预后较差。     

无球囊预扩张直接置入冠状动脉内支架

目的：探讨直接置入冠状动脉内支架的可行性及效果。 方法：４１例患者未经球囊预扩张而直接置入冠状动脉内支架,支架置入后扩张使用同一种球囊。 结果：４１例患者共置入４２个支架。病变分型为;Ａ型１６例,Ｂ１型１９例,Ｂ２型５例,Ｃ型２例。支架置入前狭窄程度为（７５．６±６．４）％。支架置入后管腔残余狭窄程度为（０．５±１．９）％。支架置入成功率为１００％,无并发症发生。随诊３０天所有患者无不良反应。５例进行随访造影,其中３例患者发生再狭窄。 结论：对于冠状动脉病变无或轻度钙化及靶病变部位前无明显弯曲,最好限于Ａ型和Ｂ型的较局限病变,可以采用直接置入支架,成功率高。     

选择性直接冠状动脉支架置入术的临床应用

近年来 ,随着球囊预装支架通过狭窄病变性能的改进及支架置入技术的成熟 ,对冠状动脉病变有选择性的直接支架置入术已开始在临床应用〔1 ,2〕。本文旨在探讨直接冠状动脉支架置入术的可行性及其效果。1　对象与方法　　自 1 997年 5月～ 2 0 0 1年 3月对 1 7例冠心病患者采取了直接冠状动脉支架置入术 ,男 1 2例 ,女5例 ,年龄 42～ 62 ( 5 6.3± 5 .2 )岁 ,其中稳定型心绞痛 4例 ,不稳定型心绞痛 8例 ,近期急性心肌梗死 3例 ,陈旧性心肌梗死 2例 ;伴糖尿病者 2例 ,伴高血压者 5例。经冠状动脉造影确定病变血管为A型或B1 型者首选直接冠状动…     

Coroflex冠状动脉内支架的临床应用

目的　评估Coroflex冠状动脉内支架的临床应用效果。方法　回顾性分析 81例接受Coroflex冠状动脉内支架置入术患者的即刻疗效和临床随访结果。结果　 81例患者共置入Coroflex冠状动脉内支架 88枚。根据ACC AHA分型 ,A B1 型病变 38处 ,B2 C型病变 5 0处。原发病变 5 2处 ,单纯球囊扩张术疗效不满意病变 2 2处 ,内膜撕裂病变 14处。支架成功置入 82处 (93 2 % )。 3例严重钙化病变需辅以高压 (16～ 18atm)球囊才充分扩张 ,2例支架远端发生内膜撕裂 ,1例弥漫性病变支架置入术后TIMI血流 2级。 75例患者平均随访 (7 5± 3 0 )月 (3～ 13月 ) ,无心源性死亡和心肌梗死 ;17例 (2 2 7% )有心绞痛 (CCS分类Ⅰ级 )发生 ;7例行冠状动脉造影复查 ,2例显示支架内再狭窄 ,予再次血管重建术后缓解。结论　Coroflex冠状动脉内支架可安全有效地应用于冠心病的介入治疗。     

老年冠心病患者冠状动脉内支架置入术的疗效评价

目的　评价老年冠心病患者冠状动脉内支架置入术的临床疗效和安全性。方法　对比分析 49例老年 (86支血管 )和 6 1例老年前期 (98支血管 )冠心病患者冠状动脉内支架置入术的结果。结果　老年组冠状动脉病变严重、复杂病变较多 ,在复杂病变内置入支架比率高于老年前期组 ;手术即刻成功率和临床成功率均为 98.0 % ;术前病变平均狭窄率为 (94.5± 5 .6 ) % ,术后残余狭窄率为 (7.4± 8.2 ) % ;因球囊扩张不理想置入支架的为 45 .0 % ,因经皮冠状动脉腔内成形术 (PTCA)并发夹层或濒临闭塞而置入支架的比率高于老年前期组。出现严重并发症 1例(2 .0 % )。结论　老年冠心病患者冠状动脉内支架置入术成功率高 ,并发症发生率低。     

Minirail双钢丝球囊在冠状动脉介入治疗中的应用

目的评价一种新型球囊导管--Minirail双钢丝球囊在冠状动脉介入治疗中的有效性和安全性.方法22例冠心病患者,其中男16例,女6例,平均年龄(58-8±8.7)岁,行择期冠状动脉介入治疗,靶病变24处(病变位于前降支17处、回旋支2处、右冠状动脉5处),其中C型病变5处、B2型病变14处、B1型病变5处,术前平均狭窄程度91.18%±5.95%,采用Minirail球囊导管行冠状动脉球囊成形术.结果Minirail球囊扩张操作成功率100%.球囊扩张后残余狭窄33.18%±25.14%;发生明显内膜撕裂3例,慢血流1例;其中19例患者植入支架共24个,术终残余狭窄1.82%±5.01%.无死亡、Q波性心肌梗死或需紧急冠状动脉旁路移植手术者.结论Minirail球囊导管方便、实用、安全、有效,在冠状动脉介入治疗中具有一定临床应用价值.     

无保护左主干冠状动脉病变支架置入术20例

1　对象与方法　　选择 1999年 1月至 2 0 0 2年 10月辽宁省人民医院无保护左主干冠状动脉病变支架置入术患者 2 0例 ,其中男 16例 ,女4例 ,年龄 3 8～ 70岁。临床表现均有心绞痛 ,选择性冠状动脉造影均证实为无保护左主干冠状动脉 (LMT)病变。即LMT狭窄程度≥ 50 %。其中LMT起始处病变 7例 ,中段病变 9例 ,远端并分叉处病变 5例。均累及回旋支。方法 :①多角度选择性冠状动脉造影 ,充分暴露LMT ,掌握LMT病变位置、长度、狭窄程度 ,以便选择欲扩张球囊大小 ,扩张部位 ,确定支架大小及置入位点。②球囊扩张选用普通左冠状动脉指引导管 …     

冠脉内支架直接置入术治疗急性冠脉综合征58例

目的:探讨未预扩张直接置入冠脉内支架术治疗急性冠脉综合征的临床疗效及安全性。方法:对58例急性冠脉综合征患者采用未预扩张直接置入冠脉内支架术进行治疗。结果:本法成功率为95％,未发生支架脱落及偏位现象,3例支架扩张后残余狭窄<30％。结论:应用未预扩张直接置入冠脉内支架术治疗冠脉中等严重狭窄(<85％)的急性冠脉综合征患者,操作简便,近期疗效确切,并发症少,安全、经济。     

Nonselected use of direct coronary stenting. The DISCO 2 trial

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Direct coronary stenting yields immediate long-term clinical results similar to those obtained with balloon predilation, with the advantage of lower costs and procedural times. Until now, direct stenting has been attempted only for selected lesions, so that the potential scope of its use in everyday practice remains unknown. The DISCO 2 trial was designed to identify the number and type of lesions that could be safely treated by direct stenting. Patients and method. 1,269 lesions (886 patients) were treated consecutively in 7 different hospitals. Direct stenting was attempted in all cases, except for total chronic occlusions, severe tortuosity or calcification of the vessel, lesions in the sinus ostium, or bifurcated lesions and vessel diameter < 2.4 mm. If the procedure failed, the stent was recovered and the lesion dilated with a balloon before a second attempt at stenting. RESULTS: Direct stenting was attempted in 585 lesions (54.9% of all electively implanted stents and 46.1% of all angioplasties). This was successful in 553 (94.6%) and failed in 32 (5.4%). In 30 of these latter patients a stent was implanted after predilation. Predictors of failure were tortuosity, location in the nonproximal right coronary artery, age > 65 years and type B2 or C lesion. After 6 months of follow-up the total incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients treated with direct stenting was 6.2%, with a target lesion revascularization rate of 4.45%. CONCLUSIONS: In a mostly nonselected sample of coronary lesions, direct stenting was as safe as stenting with predilation. More than half of all elective stenting procedures can be attempted safely without balloon predilation. Greater need for predilation was associated with tortuosity, nonproximal right coronary artery location, older age and lesion complexity (B2, C). The 6-month clinical outcome was excellent, with a low rate of repeat revascularization.     

Coronary angioplasty with direct stenting: assessment of primary results and some economical aspects

Comparison of immediate angiographical and clinical results of direct coronary stenting and stenting after predilation was carried out in 68 patients. Groups of patients subjected to direct stenting and stenting with predilation had similar clinical and angiographical characteristics. Direct stenting was successful in 100%, stenting with predilation--in 97.2% of patients with residual stenosis 5.1 and 4.9%, respectively. There were no cases of stent loss, death or emergent bypass grafting during neither the procedure nor period of hospitalization. There was 1 Q-wave myocardial infarction (2.8%) and 2 non-Q wave myocardial infarctions (1 in each group). Compared with stenting with predilation procedure of direct stenting was associated with significantly shorter procedure duration (39-/+7.1 min, 60-/+12.5 min, respectively), radiation exposure time (7.9-/+6.3 and 13.5-/+8.9 min, respectively), lower workload of the laboratory (4.9-/+3.5 and 6.1-/+2.0 patients/day, respectively), decreased consumption of contrast medium (200-/+71 and 275-/+75.9 ml, respectively), and thus lower overall cost of the procedure. CONCLUSION: Direct coronary stenting is a convenient, safe and economically justified method of stent implantation.     

Direct coronary stenting versus predilatation followed by stent placement

Direct stenting without antecedent dilatation may reduce procedural time, costs, and radiation exposure, and may result in less vessel injury. The purpose of this investigation was to compare immediate and long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes of direct stenting with stent placement after initial balloon dilation. Three hundred thirty-five symptomatic patients with single or multiple coronary lesions (diameter reduction 60% to 95%) of < or =30 mm length and with a vessel diameter of 2.5 to 4.0 mm were randomized either to direct stenting (group A, n = 171) or stenting after predilation (group B, n = 164). Patients with vessels with excessive calcification, severe proximal tortuosity, or occlusion were excluded. All patients were asked to return for routine repeat angiography at 6 months, irrespective of symptoms. Feasibility of direct stenting was 95% in group A, with 5% requiring crossover to predilation. Successful stent placement after predilation was performed in all 164 patients in group B. Direct stenting was associated with less procedural duration (group A 42.1 +/- 18.7 minutes vs group B 51.5 +/- 23.8 minutes, p = 0.004), radiation exposure time (group A 10.3 +/- 7.7 minutes vs group B 12.5 +/- 6.4 minutes, p = 0.002), amount of contrast dye used (group A 163 +/- 69 ml vs group B 197 +/- 84 ml, p <0.0001), and lower procedural costs (group A 845 +/- 167 vs group B 1,064 +/- 175, p <0.0001). Immediate angiographic results and in-hospital clinical outcomes (death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization) were not significantly different between both strategies. However, at 6-month follow-up, direct stenting was associated with a lower angiographic restenosis (group A 20% vs group B 31%, p = 0.048) and target lesion revascularization rates (group A 18% vs group B 28%; p = 0.03). This study demonstrates the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of direct stenting in eligible coronary lesions. In appropriately selected cases, direct stenting has a lower rate of angiographic restenosis up to 6 months after the procedure, resulting in fewer coronary reinterventions compared with the conventional strategy of stenting with antecedent dilatation.     

无预扩张直接冠状动脉内支架置入术20例临床观察

目的：探讨无预扩张直接冠状动脉内支架置入术的可行性、临床效果及其优越性。方法：将46例冠心病病人随机分为无预扩张直接冠状动脉内支架置入术组(观察组)20例，与传统的经球囊预扩张后冠状动脉内支架置入术组(对照组)26例进行对比分析。结果：两组病人手术操作成功率相似，均能获得满意的支架置入后冠状动脉造影结果；缓解心绞痛的效果两组无差异：随访期间两组均未发生死亡、急性心肌梗死等心脏急性事件；但观察组可缩短手术时间34．87％，减少X线曝光时间26．76％，减少造影剂用量35．80％，降低治疗费用27．62％。结论：无预扩张直接冠状动脉内支架置入术是一种安全有效的治疗方法，在某些方面优于传统的经球囊预扩张后冠状动脉内支架置入术。     

Direct stenting of native de novo coronary artery lesions with the sirolimus-eluting stent: a post hoc subanalysis of the pooled E- and C-SIRIUS trials

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the impact of direct stenting (DS) using the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) on angiographic and clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: The SES is superior to bare-metal stents in the treatment of native de novo coronary artery lesions in randomized, controlled trials. METHODS: A post hoc analysis was performed on 225 patients (158 men; 62 +/- 11 years old) who received SES in the pooled cohorts of the European and Canadian Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Coronary Lesions (E-SIRIUS and C-SIRIUS, respectively) trials. Of these patients, 57 (25%) had undergone DS at the investigator's discretion. Lesion predilation preceded SES implantation in the remaining 168 patients. RESULTS: Patient and lesion characteristics were no different between the two subgroups, except for a lower prevalence of moderate to severe lesion calcification (5% vs. predilation 19%, p=0.017) and a lower baseline diameter stenosis (61.6% vs. predilation 68.1%, p <0.001) in the DS subgroup. At eight months, in-lesion late loss (0.10 vs. 0.19 mm at predilation, p=0.14) and in-lesion binary restenosis (2.0% vs. 6.1% at predilation, p=0.46) tended to be lower after DS. Clinical follow-up at one year revealed non-significantly reduced incidences of target lesion revascularization (1.8% vs. 5.4% at predilation, p=0.46) and major adverse cardiac events (5.3% vs. 8.9% at predilation, p=0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Direct SES deployment performed at the investigator's discretion was as safe and efficacious at mid-term follow-up as stenting preceded by lesion predilation.     

Safety and Efficacy of Angiographic Guided Elective Palmaz-Schatz Stent Implantation Without Coumadin: Comparison of Stent Implantation and Angioplasty

This study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of routine high-pressure Palmaz-Schatz coronary stenting in patients with symptomatic coronary heart disease with only angiographic guidance without coumadin for poststenting treatment. Intracoronary stenting reduces restenosis rate after coronary angioplasty. High pressure stent deployment with intravascular ultrasound guidance reduces the incidence of stent thrombosis, despite reduction of anticoagulation. However, the feasibility of routine stent implantation with only angiographic guidance and without coumadin for poststenting treatment has not yet been determined. Patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for symptomatic coronary heart disease received stent implantation for abrupt or threatening vessel occlusion, vessel dissection without compromised antegrade blood flow (but at high risk for subacute occlusion and early restenosis), unsatisfactory angioplasty result with > 30% residual stenosis, and elective stent implantation in de novo lesions, restenotic lesions, and lesions in bypass grafts. Quantitative coronary analysis was performed before the procedure, immediately after, and at follow-up 6 ± 1 (SD) months later. This patient group was matched for clinical and angiographic characteristics with those patients who underwent balloon angioplasty during the same period. Patients who underwent coronary stenting had larger net gain (1.95 ± 1.0 vs 1.42 ± 0.9; P < 0.001) resulting in a larger minimal luminal diameter (2.48 ± 1.19 vs 1.78 ± 1.01; P < 0.001) at follow-up as compared with balloon angioplasty. Restenosis, defined as > 50% diameter stenosis at follow-up, occurred in 35.0% in the PTCA group and in 16.1% in the stent group (P < 0.001). Subacute stent thrombosis occured in one patient (0.8%) due to angiographically evident suboptimal stent expansion. Routine coronary high pressure Palmaz-Schatz stenting with angiographie guidance without coumadin for poststenting treatment represents a safe and effective option in patients with symptomatic coronary heart disease without increasing the incidence of (sub)acute stent thrombosis.     

Comparison of outcomes of direct stenting versus stenting after balloon predilation in patients with acute myocardial infarction (DIRAMI)

Due to recent advances in stent design, stenting without balloon predilation (direct stenting) has become more extensively used in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We performed a randomized study with broad inclusion criteria and early randomization after presentation to compare direct stenting with stenting after balloon predilation in patients with AMI. A total of 248 patients was randomized. After exclusion of patients not suitable for stenting, the final study group comprised 217 patients. Direct stenting strategy was feasible in 88% of patients with no meaningful complications. Final Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 3 flow (96% vs 94%), final Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction myocardial perfusion grade 2 or 3 (68% vs 61%), and average ST-segment resolution after the procedure (49% vs 51%) were similar in the direct stenting and predilation groups, respectively (p = NS). Rate of in-stent restenosis was higher in the direct stenting group (30% vs 16%, p = 0.024), which was due to a worse angiographic result after the procedure. At 5 years, a composite of cardiac death, reinfarction, and target lesion revascularization had occurred in 39% in the direct stenting group and 34% in the predilated group (p = 0.40). In conclusion, although at 5 years clinical outcome did not differ significantly between groups, direct stenting was associated with a higher incidence of in-stent restenosis at 1 year. Direct stenting did not improve epicardial and myocardial reperfusion indexes. Direct stenting strategy should not be recommended in all patients with AMI as an alternative strategy to stenting after predilation.     

Comparison of direct stenting versus stenting with predilation for the treatment of selected coronary narrowings.

Direct stenting may reduce costs, procedure times, and injury to the vessel wall, positively influencing acute and late results. This study was designed to demonstrate 6-month clinical outcome equivalence between direct and standard stenting techniques. Four hundred eleven patients (425 lesions) were randomized in 7 sites to undergo direct (210 patients, 216 lesions) or conventional (201 patients, 209 lesions) stent implantation. Lesions with severe calcification were excluded. Angiographic success rate was 100% in the direct stent group (2.8% requiring balloon predilation) and 98.6% in the predilation group (p = 0.12). Direct stenting was associated with decreased use of balloons (0.15 vs 1.09 balloons/lesion treated) and with a trend toward a reduction of procedure time (22.7 +/- 15.0 vs 25.6 +/- 18.2 minutes; p = 0.073). Fluoroscopy time and contrast volume were not different between groups. At 6-month follow-up, the incidences of death (direct [1.4%] vs predilation [2.5%]), myocardial infarction (5.3% vs 5.0%), and target vessel revascularization (8.2% vs 10.5%) were similar in both groups. Major adverse cardiac event-free survival rate was 87.5% for those who underwent the direct stent technique and 85.5% for patients who underwent predilation (p = 0.0002 for equivalence). In conclusion, direct stenting is at least equivalent to the standard technique in terms of 6-month clinical outcomes when performed on selected coronary lesions without significant calcification. This strategy is associated with decreased use of balloons, but, in general, does not significantly reduce procedure times.     

Predictors of recurrent restenosis after coronary stenting: an analysis of 197 patients

One of the major limitations in coronary stenting is in-stent restenosis. This study was aimed to identify clinical, angiographic, and procedural factors that may be related to recurrent in-stent restenosis. We analyzed consecutive 197 patients who underwent coronary stenting. Follow-up angiography was available in 170 patients and repeat balloon angioplasty was performed for in-stent restenosis. These patients were subdivided into 3 groups: group A consisted of 100 patients that were never restenosed, group B had 49 patients restenosed once, and in group C were 21 patients restenosed more than twice. Group C was more often female (48%) and included diabetes mellitus patients (52%). Lesion location, reference vessel size and diameter stenosis were similar for all groups. However, the incidence of calcified lesions tended to be higher (50% vs. 29%; p = 0.07), and lesion length was longer in group C than in group A (11.9+/- 5.4 mm vs. 9.0+/- 3.9 mm; p < 0.01). Diameter stenosis after predilation as well as after stenting was significantly higher in group C than in group A (50+/- 10% vs 39+/- 10%; p < 0.01, 32+/- 8% vs. 19+/- 10%; p < 0.01). The incidence of diffuse type of in-stent restenosis was significantly higher in group C than in group B (62% vs. 14%; p < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified diameter stenosis after stenting (p = 0.0022), female (p = 0.0135), and diameter stenosis after predilatation (p = 0.0233) as the significant correlate of recurrent in-stent restenosis. In conclusion, the major recurrent in-stent restenosis predictors identified included female gender, final diameter stenosis, and diameter stenosis after predilatation.