Michał Kuzemczak, Janusz Lipiecki, Jacek Legutko, Johan Bennett, Joseph Dens, Mohammad Alkhalil
{"title":"Clinical outcomes of intravascular lithotripsy according to the timing of stent failure: Insights from the COIL registry.","authors":"Michał Kuzemczak, Janusz Lipiecki, Jacek Legutko, Johan Bennett, Joseph Dens, Mohammad Alkhalil","doi":"10.5603/cj.103163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cumulative data has highlighted the efficacy of intra-vascular lithotripsy (IVL) in patients with stent failure (SF). However, it remains unclear whether the effectiveness of IVL, and subsequent clinical outcomes, are influenced by the timing of SF. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with SF undergoing IVL according to the age of index stent implantation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the COIL registry (coronary intravascular lithotripsy in patients with stent failure), which included patients who underwent IVL treatment for SF, divided according to the timing of SF, i.e., early (≤12 months), mid-term (12-36 months), and late SF (>36 months). Procedural and clinical outcomes up to 12 months following IVL treatment were recorded. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 88 patients included in this sub-study, of whom 40 (45%), 17 (19%), and 31 (35%) had early, mid-term, and late SF, respectively. Final procedural results were better in those with early compared to mid-term or late SF. At one-year follow-up, the incidence of the primary endpoint was associated with the timing of SF (8% vs. 12% vs. 29%, p = 0.042). The difference among the subgroups was driven by TVR (3% vs. 12% vs. 29%, p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Procedural and clinical outcomes following IVL treatment for patients with SF were influenced by the timing of index stent implantation. Further studies are needed to better understand the mechanisms behind recurrent SF.</p>","PeriodicalId":93923,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/cj.103163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Cumulative data has highlighted the efficacy of intra-vascular lithotripsy (IVL) in patients with stent failure (SF). However, it remains unclear whether the effectiveness of IVL, and subsequent clinical outcomes, are influenced by the timing of SF. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with SF undergoing IVL according to the age of index stent implantation.
Methods: This is a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the COIL registry (coronary intravascular lithotripsy in patients with stent failure), which included patients who underwent IVL treatment for SF, divided according to the timing of SF, i.e., early (≤12 months), mid-term (12-36 months), and late SF (>36 months). Procedural and clinical outcomes up to 12 months following IVL treatment were recorded. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR).
Results: There were 88 patients included in this sub-study, of whom 40 (45%), 17 (19%), and 31 (35%) had early, mid-term, and late SF, respectively. Final procedural results were better in those with early compared to mid-term or late SF. At one-year follow-up, the incidence of the primary endpoint was associated with the timing of SF (8% vs. 12% vs. 29%, p = 0.042). The difference among the subgroups was driven by TVR (3% vs. 12% vs. 29%, p = 0.005).
Conclusions: Procedural and clinical outcomes following IVL treatment for patients with SF were influenced by the timing of index stent implantation. Further studies are needed to better understand the mechanisms behind recurrent SF.
背景:累积数据强调了血管内碎石术(IVL)在支架失效(SF)患者中的疗效。然而,IVL的有效性和随后的临床结果是否受到SF时机的影响尚不清楚。我们的目的是评估SF患者接受IVL的结果,根据年龄的指数支架植入术。方法:这是对COIL登记(支架失效患者的冠状动脉血管内碎石术)预先指定的亚组分析,其中包括接受IVL治疗的SF患者,根据SF的时间进行划分,即早期(≤12个月),中期(12-36个月)和晚期SF(>36个月)。记录IVL治疗后12个月的程序和临床结果。主要终点定义为心血管死亡、自发性心肌梗死或靶血管重建术(TVR)的复合终点。结果:本亚研究共纳入88例患者,其中早期SF 40例(45%),中期SF 17例(19%),晚期SF 31例(35%)。与中期或晚期SF患者相比,早期SF患者的最终手术结果更好。在一年的随访中,主要终点的发生率与SF发生的时间相关(8% vs. 12% vs. 29%, p = 0.042)。亚组间的差异由TVR驱动(3% vs. 12% vs. 29%, p = 0.005)。结论:SF患者IVL治疗后的手术和临床结果受指数支架植入时间的影响。需要进一步的研究来更好地了解复发性SF背后的机制。