Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Imaging and Intervention in Cardiology pp 311–340Cite as

Angiographic assessment of immediate success and the problem (definition) of restenosis after coronary interventions

  • Chapter

  • 60 Accesses

Part of the book series: Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine ((DICM,volume 173))

Abstract

Despite the recent technological advances in medical imaging which have facilitated ultrasonographic and angioscopic imaging of the coronary vessel wall and lumen, which are described in other areas of this book, coronary angiography is still the universal routine clinical imaging technique both for guiding and assessing acute results of coronary interventions, as well as for evaluating long term restenosis. In this chapter, we discuss the angiographic assessment of [1] success of coronary interventions in the immediate term and [2] especially in the long term, with specific emphasis on evolving methodological approaches to defining restenosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ellis SG, Roubin GS, King SB III et al. Angiographic and clinical predictors of acute closure after native vessel coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1988; 77: 372–79.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Detre KM, Holmes DR, Holubkov R et al., coinvestigators of the NHLBI PTCA Registry. Incidence and consequences of periprocedural occlusion: The 1985–1986 NHLBI PTCA Registry. Circulation 1990; 82: 739–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. de Feyter PJ, van den Brand M, Laarman GJ et al. Acute coronary artery occlusion during and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Frequency, prediction, clinical course, management and follow-up. Circulation 1991; 83: 927–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lineoff AM, Popma JJ, Ellis SG et al. Abrupt vessel closure complicating coronary angioplasty: Clinical, angiographic and therapeutic profile. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 926–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Reif art N, Preusler W, Storger H et al. Outcome of 10,000 coronary interventional procedures without on-site surgical backup (Abstr). Circulation 1993; 88: 1–217.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Block PC, Myler RK, Stertzer S et al. Morphology after transluminal angioplasty in human beings. N Engl J Med 1981; 305: 382–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Waller BF. “Crackers, Breakers, Stretchers, Drillers, Scrapers, Shavers, Burners, Welders and Melters”.The future treatment of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease? A clinical-morphologic assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 13: 969–87.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fischell TA, Derby G, Tse TM, Stadius ML. Coronary artery vasoconstriction routinely occurs after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A quantitative arteriographic analysis. Circulation 1988; 78: 1323–34.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Rensing BJ, Hermans WRM, Beatt KJ et al. Quantitative angiographic assessment of elastic recoil after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1990; 66: 1039–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Tenaglia AN, Buller CE, Kisslo KB et al. Mechanisms of directional atherectomy and balloon angioplasty as assessed by intracoronary ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 20: 685–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Braden GA, Herrington DM, Downes TR et al. Qualitative and quantitative contrasts in the mechanisms of lumen enlargement by coronary balloon angioplasty and directional coronary atherectomy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 40–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Den Heyer P, Foley DP, Escaned J et al. Angioscopic versus angiographic detection of intimai dissection and intracoronary thrombus. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 649–55.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jain SP, White CJ, Collins TJ et al. Etiologies of abrupt occlusion at PTCA: Angioscopic morphology. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 484A.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hermans WR, Foley DP, Rensing BJ et al., on behalf of the Carport and Mercator Study groups. Usefulness of quantitative and qualitative angiographic lesion morphology and clinical characteristics in predicting major adverse cardiac events during and after native coronary balloon angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1993; 72: 14–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sutton JM, Ellis SG, Roubin GS et al. Major clinical events after coronary stenting: The multicentre registry of acute and elective Gianturco-Roubin stent placement. Circulation 1994; 89: 1126–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Serruys PW, Strauss BH, Beatt KJ et al. Angiographic follow-up after placement of a self-expanding coronary artery stent. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 13–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Carrozza JP Jr., Kuntz RE, Levine MJ et al. Angiographic and clinical outcome of intracoronary stenting: Immediate and long term results from a large single-center experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 20: 328–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schatz RA, Bairn DS, Leon M et al. Clinical experience with the Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent. Initial results of a multicenter study. Circulation 1991; 83: 148–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Serruys PW, Macaya C, de Jaegere P et al., for the Benestent study group. A comparison of balloon angioplasty and Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 489–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Schatz RA, Penn IM, Baim DS et al., for the STRESS investigators. A randomized comparison of coronary artery stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 496–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Den Heyer P, van Dijk RB, Twisk SP, Lie KI. Early stent occlusion is not always caused by thrombosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn 1993; 29: 136–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Danchin N, Juilliere Y, Beatt KJ et al. Visual assessment of coronary artery stenoses: Is the 90% diameter stenosis an invalid concept? Eur Heart J 1988; 9 (Abstr Suppl): 0406.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rensing BJ, Hermans WR, Deckers JW et al. Luminal narrowing after percutaneous transluminal coronary balloon angioplasty follows a near Gaussian distribution. A quanti- tative angiographic study in 1445 successfully dilated lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 939–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Fleming RM, Kirkeeide RL, Smalling RW, Gould KL. Patterns in visual interpretation of coronary angiograms as detected by quantitative coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18: 945–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. DeRouen TA, Murray JA, Owen W. Variability in the analysis of coronary arteriograms. Circulation 1977; 55: 324–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Meier B, Gruentzig AR, Goebel N et al. Assessment of stenoses in coronary angioplasty: Inter- and intraobserver variability. Int J Cardiol 1983; 3: 159–69.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Arnett EN, Isner JM, Redwood DR et al. Coronary artery narrowing in coronary heart disease: Comparison of cineangiographic and necropsy findings. Ann Int Med 1979; 91: 350–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. White CW, Wright CB, Doty DB et al. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriog- ram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N Engl J Med 1984; 310: 819–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Beaumann GJ, Vogel RA. Accuracy of individual and panel visual interpretations of coronary arteriograms: Implications for clinical decisions. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 16: 108–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Danchin N, Juilliere Y, Foley DP, Serruys PW. Visual versus quantitative assessment of the severity of coronary artery stenoses: Can the angiographer’s eye be re-educated? Am Heart J 1993; 126: 594–600.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Gould KL, Lipscomb K, Hamilton GW. Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenoses: Instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 1974; 33: 87–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Serruys PW, Reiber JHC, Wijns W et al. Assessment of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by quantitative coronary angiography: Diameter versus densitometric area measurements. Am J Cardiol 1984; 54: 482–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Reiber JHC, Serruys PW. Quantitative Coronary Angiography. In: Marcus ML, Schelbert HR, Skorton DJ, Wolf Gl, editors. Cardiac imaging, a companion to Braunwalds heart disease. New York: Saunders, 1991: 211–80.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Escaned J, Foley DP, Haase J et al. Quantitative coronary angiography during coronary angioplasty with a single angiographic view: A comparison of automated edge-detection and videodensitometric techniques. Am Heart J 1993; 126: 1326–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sanz ML, Mancini J, LeFree MT. Variability of quantitative digital subtraction angiography before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1987; 60: 55–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. The Mercator Study Group. Does the new angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor Cilazapril prevent restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty? The results of the Mercator study: A multicentre randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Circulation 1992; 86: 100–11.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hermans WRM, Rensing BJ, Foley DP et al. “Therapeutic dissection” and the occurrence of restenosis. A quantitative angiographic analysis in 778 lesions after successful angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 20: 767–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Foley DP, Deckers J, van den Bos AA et al. Is there a need for repeat coronary angio graphy 24 hours after successful balloon angioplasty, to evaluate early luminal deterioration and facilitate quantitative analysis. Am J Cardiol 1993; 72: 1342–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hanet C, Wijns W, Michel X, Schroeder E. Influence of balloon size and stenosis morphology on immediate and delayed elastic recoil after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18: 506–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hanet C, Michel X, Schroeder E, Wijns W. Lack of detectable delayed elastic recoil during the first 24 hours after coronary balloon angioplasty (Abstr). Eur Heart J 1992; 13 (Abstr Suppl): 2228.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lablanche JM on behalf of the FACT Investigators. Recoil twenty four hours after coronary angioplasty: A computerized angiographic study (Abstr). J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 35A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Thomas AC, Davies MJ, Duly S et al. Potential errors in the estimation of coronary arterial stenosis from clinical arteriography with reference to the shape of the coronary arterial lumen. Br Heart J 1986; 55: 129–39.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Foley DP, Rodenberg L, Hermans WR, Deckers JW. Coronary luminal measurements from multiple “matched” angiographic projections compared with single “worst” projection. Circulation 1993; 1-641(Abstr).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Serruys PW, Rutsch W, Heyndrickx GR et al. Prevention of restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with thromboxane A2 receptor blockade. A randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial. Circulation 1991; 84: 1568–80.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Faxon DP, on behalf of the MARCATOR investigators. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition and restenosis: The final results of the MARCATOR trial. Circulation 1992: 86: 1–53 (Abstr).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Serruys PW, Klein W, Thijssen JPG et al. Evaluation of Ketanserin in the prevention of restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: A multicentre randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Circulation 1993; 88: 1588–601.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Foley DP, Bonnier H, Jackson G et al., on behalf of the FLARE study group. Prevention of restenosis after coronary balloon angioplasty: Rationale and design of the FLuvastatin Angioplasty REstenosis (FLARE) trial. Am J Cardiol 1994; 73: 50D–61D.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Hirshfeld JW, Schwartz SS, Jugo R et al., and the M-Heart Investigators. Restenosis after coronary angioplasty: A multivariate statistical model to relate lesion and procedural variables to restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18: 647–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bourassa MG, Lesperance J, Eastwood C et al. Clinical, physiologic, anatomic, and procedural factors predictive of restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18: 368–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Popma JJ, Califf RM, Topol EJ. Clinical trials of restenosis following angioplasty. Circulation 1991; 84: 1426–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Popma JJ, De Cesare N, Pinkerton CA et al. Quantitative analysis of factors affecting late lumen loss and restenosis after directional atherectomy. Am J Cardiol 1993; 71: 552–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Topol EJ, Ley a F, Pinkerton CA et al., for the CAVEAT study group. A comparison of directional atherectomy with coronary angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 221–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Adelman AG, Cohen EA, Kimball BP et al. A comparison of directional atherectomy with balloon angioplasty for lesions of the left anterior descending coronary artery. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 228–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Kuntz RE, Safian RD, Carroza JP et al. The importance of acute luminal diameter in determining restenosis after coronary atherectomy or stenting. Circulation 1992; 86; 1827–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Kuntz RE, Hinohara T, Robertson GC et al. Influence of vessel selection on the observed restenosis rate after endoluminal stenting or directional atherectomy. Am J Cardiol 1992; 70: 1101–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Kuntz RE, Gibson CM, Nobuyoshi M, Bairn DS. Generalized model of restenosis after conventional balloon angioplasty, stenting and directional atherectomy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 15–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Lineoff AM, Keeler GP, Berdan LG et al., for the CAVEAT investigators. “Worst view” angiographic analysis in CAVEAT provided a “worst case” scenario of restenosis rates and vessel luminal diameters (Abstr). Circulation 1994; 90: I-60.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Kuntz RE, Bairn DS. Defining coronary restenosis. Newer clinical and angiographic para- digms. Circulation 1993; 88: 1310–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Nakamura S, Colombo A, Gaglione A et al. Intracoronary ultrasound observations during stent implantation. Circulation 1994; 89: 2026–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Colombo A, Hall P, Almagor Y et al. Results of intravascular ultrasound guided coronary stenting without subsequent anticoagulation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994: 335A.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Kloeke FJ. Measurements of coronary blood flow and degree of stenosis. Current clinical implications and continuing uncertainties. J Am Coll Cardiol 1983; 1: 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Kirkeeide RL, Gould KL, Parsel L. Assessment of coronary stenoses by myocardial perfusion imaging during pharmacologic coronary vasodilation. Validation of coronary flow reserve as a single integrated functional measure of stenosis severity reflecting all its geometric dimensions. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986; 7: 103–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Zijlstra F, Fioretti P, Reiber JHC, Serruys PW. Which cineangiographically assessed anatomic variable correlates best with functional measurements of stenosis severity? A comparison of quantitative analysis of the coronary cineangiogram with measured coronary flow reserve and exercise/redistribution Thallium-201 scintigraphy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 12: 686–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Di Mario C, Krams R, de Feyter PJ, Serruys PW. Slope of the instantaneous hyperemic diastolic coronary flow velocity-pressure relation: A new index for the assessment of the physiological significance of coronary stenosis in humans. Circulation 1994; 90: 1215–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Zijlstra F, den Boer A, Reiber JHC et al. The assessment of immediate and long-term functional results of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1988; 1: 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Hodgson JM, Riley RS, Most AS, Williams DO. Assessment of coronary flow reserve using digital angiography before and after successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1987; 60: 61–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Laarman, GJ, Serruys PW, Suryapranata H et al. Inability of coronary blood flow reserve measurements to assess the efficacy of coronary angioplasty in the first 24 hours in unse-lected patients. Am Heart J 1991; 122: 631–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Califf RM, Ohman EM, Frid DJ et al. Restenosis: The clinical issues. In: Topoi EJ, editor. Textbook of interventional cardiology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1990: 363–94.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Laarman GJ, Luijten HE, van Zeyl LG et al. Assessment of “silent” restenosis and long-term follow-up after successful angioplasty in single vessel coronary artery disease: The value of quantitative exercise electrocardiography and quantitative coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 16: 578–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Brown BG, Bolson E, Frimer M, Dodge HT. Quantitative coronary arteriography. Estimations of dimensions, haemodynamic resistance and atheroma mass of coronary artery lesions using the arteriograms and digital computation. Circulation 1977; 55: 329–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Reiber JHC, Booman S, Tan HS et al. A cardiac image analysis system. Objective quantitative processing of angiocardiograms. Proc Comp Cardiol 1978: 239–42.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Reiber JHC, Serruys PW, Kooijman CJ et al. Assessment of short-, medium-, and long-term variations in arterial dimensions from computer assisted quantitation of coronary cineangiograms. Circulation 1985; 71: 280–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Serruys PW, Luijten HE, Beatt KJ et al. Incidence of restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty: A time-related phenomenon. A quantitative angiographic study in 342 consecutive patients at 1, 2, 3 and 4 months. Circulation 1988; 77: 361–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Nobuyoshi M, Kimura H, Nosaka H et al. Restenosis after successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: Serial angiographic follow-up of 299 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 12: 616–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Kuntz RE, Safian RD, Levine MJ et al. Novel approach to the analysis of restenosis after the use of three new coronary devices. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 1493–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. King SB III, Weintraub WS, Tao X et al. Bimodal distribution of diameter stenosis 4 to 12 months after angioplasty: Implications for definitions and interpretation of restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 17: 345A (Abstr).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Forrester JS, Fishbein M, Helfant R, Fagin J. A paradigm for restenosis based on cell biology: Clues for development of new preventive therapies. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 17: 758–69.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Serruys PW, Rensing BJ, Luijten HE et al. Restenosis following coronary angioplasty. In: Meier B, editor. Interventional cardiology, Toronto, Lewiston, New York, Bern, Gottingen, Stuttgart: Hogrefe and Huber, 1990: 79–115.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Serruys PW, Foley DP, Kirkeeide RL, King SB III. Restenosis Revisited - insights provided by quantitative coronary angiography. Am Heart J 1993; 126: 1243–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Rensing BJ, Hermans WR, Vos J et al., on behalf of the Carport Study group. Quantitative angiographic risk factors of luminal narrowing after coronary balloon angioplasty using balloon measurements to reflect stretch and elastic recoil at the dilatation site. Am J Cardiol 1992; 69: 584–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Rensing BJ, Hermans WRM, Vos J et al. on behalf of the Coronary Artery Restenosis Prevention on Repeated Thromboxane Antagonism (CARPORT) study group. Luminal narrowing after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A study of clinical, procedural and lesionai factors related to long term angiographic outcome. Circulation 1993; 88: 975–85.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Hermans WRM, Rensing BJ, Foley DP et al., on behalf of the MERCATOR study group. Patient, lesion and procedural variables as risk factors for luminal re-narrowing after successful coronary angioplasty: A quantitative analysis in 653 patients with 778 lesions. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993; 22: S45–S57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. de Jaegere P, Serruys PW, Bertrand M et al. Angiographic predictors of recurrence of restenosis after Wiktor stent implantation in native coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 1993; 72: 165–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Umans VA, Robert A, Foley DP et al. Clinical, histologic and quantitative angiographic predictors of restenosis following directional coronary atherectomy: A multivariate analysis of the renarrowing process and late outcome. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 49–58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Schwartz RS, Huber KC, Murphy JG et al. Restenosis and the proportional neointimal response to coronary artery injury: Results in a porcine model. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 267–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Foley DP, Melkert R, Serruys PW. The influence of coronary vessel size on the renarrowing process and late angiographic outcome after successful balloon angioplasty. Circulation 1994; 90: 1239–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Umans VA, Keane D, Foley DP et al. Optimal use of directional coronary atherectomy is required to ensure long-term angiographic benefit: A study with matched procedural outcome after atherectomy and angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 24: 1652–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Foley DP, Keane D, Serruys PW. Does the method of transluminal coronary revascularization influence restenosis? A comparison of balloon angioplasty, atherectomy and stents. Br J Clin Pract 1995; 49: 7–15.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Foley DP, Serruys PW. Restenosis after percutaneous intervention: Is there a device specificity? In: Topol E and Serruys PW, editors. Current review of interventional cardiology. Philadelphia: Current Medicine, 1995; 236–58.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Kuntz RE, Foley DP, Keeler GP et al. on behalf of the CAVEAT investigators. Relationship of acute luminal gain to late loss following directional atherectomy or balloon angiopla-sty in CAVEAT. Circulation 1993: I-5 (Abstr).

    Google Scholar 

  91. Foley DP, Melkert R, Umans VA et al. Is the relationship between luminal increase and subsequent renarrowing linear or non-linear in patients undergoing coronary interventions? J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 302A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Lehmann KG, Melkert R, Serruys PW. Contributions of frequency distribution analysis to the understanding of coronary restenosis. Circulation 1994; 90: I-59 (Abstr).

    Google Scholar 

  93. Haude M, Erbel R, Issa H, Meyer J. Quantitative analysis of elastic recoil after balloon angioplasty and after intracoronary implantation of balloon-expandable Palmaz-Schatz stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 26–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Kimball BP, Bui S, Cohen EA et al. Comparison of acute elastic recoil after directional atherecomy versus standard balloon angioplasty. Am Heart J 1992; 124: 1459–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Kovach JA, Mintz GS, Kent KM et al. Serial intravascular ultrasound studies indicate that chronic recoil is an important mechanism of restenosis following transcatheter therapy (Abstr). J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 484A.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Kakuta T, Currier JW, Haudenschild CC et al. Differences in compensatory vessel enlargement, not intimai formation, account for restenosis after angioplasty in the hypercholester-olemic rabbit. Circulation 1994; 89: 2809–15.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Post MJ, Borst C, Kuntz RE. The relative importance of arterial remodelling compared with intimai hyperplasia in lumen renarrowing after balloon angioplasty. A study in the normal rabbit and the hypercholesterolemic Yucatan micropig. Circulation 1994; 89: 2816–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Isner JM. Vascular remodelling. Honey, I think I shrunk the artery. Circulation 1994; 89: 2937–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Glagov S. Intimai hyperplasia, vascular remodelling and the restenosis problem. Circulation 1994; 89: 2888–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK et al. Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med 1987; 316; 1371–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Losordo DW, Rosenfield K, Kaufman J et al. Focal compensatory enlargement of human coronary arteries in response to progressive atherosclerosis: In vivo documentation using intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 1994; 89: 2570–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Erasmus University, Ee 2332, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Prof. Patrick W. Serruys

Authors
  1. David P. Foley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. Patrick W. Serruys
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, D-20246, Hamburg, Germany

    Christoph A. Nienaber

  2. Klinik III für Innere Medizin, University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmannstrasse 9, D-50924, Cologne, Germany

    Udo Sechtem

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Foley, D.P., Serruys, P.W. (1996). Angiographic assessment of immediate success and the problem (definition) of restenosis after coronary interventions. In: Nienaber, C.A., Sechtem, U. (eds) Imaging and Intervention in Cardiology. Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine, vol 173. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0115-5_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0115-5_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6538-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-0115-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation