药物洗脱球囊治疗支架内再狭窄的研究进展

正经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI)经历了30年的发展历程,而减少术后再狭窄一直是人们努力的方向。单纯经皮冠状动脉腔内成形术(percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty,PTCA)再狭窄高达39%~67%[1],裸金属支架(bare-metal stent,BMS)置入术后再狭窄可达5%~35%[2],药物洗脱支架(drug-eluting stent,DES)置入术后再狭窄仍达5%~10%[3]。近些年来出现了预防介入治疗术后血管再狭窄的新技术—药物洗脱球囊     

紫杉醇药物洗脱球囊与西罗莫司药物洗脱支架治疗再狭窄的比较

目的:本研究旨在对中国人群中紫杉醇药物洗脱球囊(PEB)和西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)治疗支架内再狭窄(ISR)的有效性进行比较。方法:连续入选2014年9月至2015年6月,经冠状动脉造影确诊ISR并接受PEB或SES治疗的患者,根据所接受的治疗策略将患者分别纳入PEB组和SES组。观察两组患者住院期间主要不良心血管事件(MACE)发生率,术后12个月进行电话或门诊随访了解两组MACE发生情况。结果:共纳入患者166例,其中PEB组63例,SES组103例;两组中药物洗脱支架再狭窄(DES-ISR)患者116例,包括PEB组44例和SES组72例;根据Mehran分型,点状病变患者33例,非点状病变患者133例。住院期间两组患者均未发生MACE。(13±2)个月临床随访发现,PEB组共发生MACE 6例,包括非致死性心肌梗死(MI)2例和靶血管血运重建(TVR)5例;SES组MACE 9例,包括全因死亡3例和TVR 7例;两组间MACE发生率差异无统计学意义(9.7%vs.9.2%,P=0.92)。两组间的全因死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、靶病变血运重建和靶血管血运重建发生率均差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。DES-ISR患者中,PEB组和SES组的MACE发生率差异无统计学意义(7.0%vs.10.3%,P=0.74)。而在点状病变和非点状病变患者中,两组间MACE发生率均差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:中国人群中紫杉醇药物洗脱球囊与西罗莫司药物洗脱支架,治疗支架内再狭窄的有效性差异无统计学意义,且在DES-ISR、点状病变和非点状病变患者中两种治疗方式也无明显差异。     

药物涂层球囊治疗冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄临床分析

目的分析药物涂层球囊(DCB)在治疗冠状动脉药物涂层支架内再狭窄病变中的疗效。方法回顾性分析20例冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄患者接受药物涂层球囊治疗的临床资料及随访结果。结果 20例患者共21处再狭窄病变接受DCB治疗,术中即刻成功率95.23%,1处病变在应用DCB治疗后并发夹层并出现TIMI 2级血流,然后植入药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗。所有病例术后随访至今无心绞痛再发,未发生主要心血管不良事件。其中12例患者在术后6~9个月接受冠状动脉造影复查,复查时靶病变最小管腔直径与术后即刻直径比较,按病变血管统计,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);合计统计比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 DCB治疗DES支架内再狭窄即刻及短期疗效肯定,可以作为支架内再狭窄的一种新的治疗手段。     

第二代药物洗脱支架

自2002年药物洗脱支架被引入以来,该类支架已经在冠状动脉介入治疗中获广泛应用。药物洗脱支架就是在金属裸支架的表面涂以包含抗增殖剂的聚合物。这种聚合物能在支架置入后的数周至数月内持续释放并持续抑制血管内膜增生。第一代药物洗脱支架主要是西罗莫司和紫杉醇支架,相对于金属裸支架和单纯球囊扩张,它在减少支架内再狭窄和再次介入方面显示了优势。     

冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄的最新研究进展

药物洗脱支架（DES）的诞生和不断优化已经大大提高了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）的安全性和有效性,但随着病例复杂性的增加和DES的超适应证应用,术后再狭窄率正逐年上升。因此,当前DES时代下,支架内再狭窄（ISR）仍是临床上亟待解决的一大难题。本文将主要就DES置入后ISR发生发展的病理机制、组织病理学及治疗策略的最新研究成果及进展进行综述。     

药物洗脱支架治疗支架内再狭窄

20世纪初,随着以Cypher(Cordis公司, Johnson & Johnson)和TAXUS为代表的药物洗脱支架应用于临床,在降低再狭窄发生率和改善冠心病介入治疗预后上取得了显著的进展,被誉为冠心病介入治疗史上的第三个里程碑[1,2],但是,药物洗脱支架在高危复杂病变中的疗效尚有待进一步证实.本研究旨在评价雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架(SES)在支架内再狭窄(ISR)治疗中的价值.     

药物洗脱支架内再狭窄研究进展

药物洗脱支架大幅度减少了支架内再狭窄的发生率,然而随着药物洗脱支架的广泛应用,再狭窄患者的绝对数量是一个不容忽视的庞大数字。再狭窄的临床表现常常是再发心绞痛,但是有些患者表现为急性心肌梗死。再狭窄的发生可能和生物因素、机械因素、技术因素有关。再狭窄的类型主要是局限性的。     

药物洗脱支架与支架内再狭窄

随着药物洗脱支架(Drug Eluting Stent, DES)的出现,再狭窄的问题得到进一步的有效控制,目前的临床证据表明DES总的再狭窄率已经在10%以下.但DES的支架内再狭窄ISR仍是临床介入治疗面临的重要问题.     

药物洗脱球囊的临床应用进展

药物洗脱球囊的出现为冠状动脉介入治疗提供了一个新的思路,由于其易用性及能避免支架植入后的缺陷,因此被逐步投入到临床应用当中。药物洗脱球囊在治疗支架内再狭窄方面的有效性与安全性已得到证实,在欧洲心脏病学会的指南中被作为对冠状动脉血管再通中裸金属支架放置后再狭窄治疗的ⅡA级推荐。但其进一步广泛应用也面临许多悬而未决的问题,其应用前景尚有待在不同临床环境下进行更深入的评估。     

药物洗脱球囊的发展及其临床应用

<正>介入治疗是冠心病治疗史上的革命性突破,到目前为止应用最成功的是药物洗脱支架(drug eluting stent,DES),DES既可防止球囊扩张后的弹性回缩,又能在病变局部提供缓慢和长期高浓度的药物释放,抑制细胞过度增殖和抗血管重塑,使再狭窄的发生率降至5%左右。DES显著改善了介入治疗的预后,但也带来了许多新的问题:支架表面的多聚物涂层基质可诱发炎症反应、延缓伤口愈合,涂层药物     

Comparison between drug-coated balloon angioplasty and second-generation drug-eluting stent placement for the treatment of in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation

Even though drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has emerged as a treatment option for drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (DES–ISR), the most effective treatment strategy for DES–ISR is still under debate. Therefore, we compared long-term clinical outcomes following DCB treatment of DES–ISR with those following 2nd-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment. We identified 248 DES–ISR lesions in 238 patients that were treated with either 2nd-generation DES implantation (n = 56) or DCB angioplasty (n = 192). We compared the incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in the two groups during the 2-year period following treatment. MACE was defined as cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or target-vessel revascularization. The percentage of patients with diabetes and the mean age of patients in the DCB group were greater than in the DES group. The DCB group also had a smaller reference vessel diameter. The DES group had a larger post-intervention minimal luminal diameter. We found no significant difference in the MACE rate between the two groups during the 2 years following treatment (11.0 % in the DCB group vs. 8.9 % in the DES group, p = 0.660). Reference segment diameter was the only independent predictive factor for MACE in the post-treatment period (hazard ratio 0.35, 95 % confidence interval: 0.15–0.82, p = 0.016). Clinical efficacy of DCB angioplasty for treatment of DES–ISR was comparable to that of 2nd-generation DES implantation as measured by the rate of MACEs in the two groups. Reference segment diameter was the only statistically significant independent predictor for MACE in the 2-year period following treatment.     

Drug-eluting stents or balloon angioplasty for drug-eluting stent-associated restenosis: An observational follow-up study of first-time versus repeated restenosis

Background

The treatment of patients with repeated drug-eluting stent–in stent restenosis (DES-ISR) remains a challenge and a burdensome clinical problem.

Local drug-delivery balloon for proliferative occlusive in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent

Drug-coated balloon has been developed as an alternative to drug-eluting stents for in-stent restenosis but the performance of drug infusion balloon in such setting has not been previously described. We present a case of particularly aggressive in-stent restenosis after drug eluting stent implantation treated with a new kind of drug infusion balloon developed in order to overcome the impossibility to inflate regular drug-coated balloon for several dilatation.     

关于药物洗脱支架再狭窄研究的进展

支架内再狭窄是介入治疗技术中面临的重要医学难题,药物洗脱支架明显降低支架内再狭窄率,然而在抑制血管平滑肌细胞过度增殖的同时,也抑制了支架处内皮功能和生长,其内皮化延迟可导致晚期再狭窄及延迟血栓的形成。本文就药物洗脱支架再狭窄现状、影响因素、发生机制和各种治疗方法的研究进展做一综述。     

Drug-eluting stent implantation for treatment of recurrent renal artery in-stent restenosis.

Percutaneous renal artery stenting has become the treatment of choice for renal artery stenosis. In-stent restenosis (ISR) still remains a persistent problem. Drug eluting stents have significantly reduced the incidence of ISR in coronary arteries. We report a case in which recurrent renal ISR was successfully treated with paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation, using intravascular ultrasound guidance, with maintained stent patency at 6 months.     

Drug-eluting stent for recurrent mesenteric artery in-stent restenosis.

PURPOSE: To report the use of a drug-eluting stent (DES) for treatment of symptomatic in-stent restenosis (ISR) in the superior mesenteric artery (SMA). CASE REPORT: A 79-year-old woman suffering from chronic renal failure and needing dialysis was admitted for vomiting, postprandial abdominal pain, and weight loss for 3 months. Computed tomographic angiography (CTA) documented massive calcification of the vascular bed, mainly in the aorta, and a very tight ostial stenosis of the SMA. A 4.5-x20-mm Genesis stent was deployed at the ostium, with good angiographic result and immediate symptomatic benefit. After 3 months, symptoms recurred; angiography demonstrated ISR. Percutaneous angioplasty with a 4-x15-mm cutting balloon was performed. The patient remained asymptomatic for only 2 months; recurrent ISR at this time was treated with a 3.5-x24-mm coronary TAXUS Express paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent deployed inside the previously implanted stent. Under prolonged double antiplatelet regimen, the patient was asymptomatic at the 8-month follow-up; CTA demonstrated patency of the SMA. CONCLUSION: Considering the high rate of restenosis and the periprocedural complications described with endovascular treatment of SMA stenosis, a drug-eluting stent may be a good option not only for the treatment of restenosis but also in de novo lesions, at least when the vessel diameter is <4.5 mm.     

Intravascular brachytherapy versus drug-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis

Drug-eluting stents (DESs), although promising technology, still are associated with restenosis; therefore, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of intravascular radiation therapy for the treatment of DES in-stent restenosis (ISR). Treatment of DES ISR has not been established, although intravascular radiation therapy is an effective treatment for patients with ISR of bare metal stents. Other modalities are conventional percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including restenting with DES. Radiation for Eluting Stents in Coronary FailUrE (RESCUE) is an international, Internet-based registry of 61 patients who presented with ISR of a DES and were assigned to intravascular radiation therapy with commercially available systems after PCI. Outcomes of these patients were compared with those of a consecutive series of 50 patients who presented with ISR of a DES and were assigned to repeat DES (r-DES) treatment. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for more Cypher stents as the initial DES that restenosed in the r-DES group than in the intravascular radiation therapy group (88.5% vs 69%, p = 0.01). At 8 months there were fewer overall major adverse cardiac events in the intravascular radiation therapy group compared with the r-DES group (9.8% vs 24%, p = 0.044). The need for target vessel and target lesion revascularizations was similar in the 2 groups at 8 months. There has been no report of subacute thrombosis in either group. In conclusion, intravascular radiation therapy as adjunct therapy to PCI for patients presenting with ISR of a DES is safe and should be considered an alternative therapeutic option for this difficult subset of patients.