2015
DOI: 10.1161/circinterventions.115.002778
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficacy of Various Percutaneous Interventions for In-Stent Restenosis

Abstract: Background— In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a difficult problem in interventional cardiology. The relative efficacy and safety of available interventions is not clear. We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis using both direct evidence and indirect evidence to compare all available interventions. Methods and Results— We systematically searched electronic databases for randomized trials comparing ≥2 treatments for ISR. A network meta-analysis was pe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This analysis suggested that PCI with second-generation DES (EES) was the most effective treatment, whereas percutaneous coronary intervention with DEB was ranked as the second most effective treatment but without significant differences from first-generation DES. Two additional similar design meta-analyses have reported similar findings suggesting second generation DES as treatment of choice for BMS and DES-ISR[ 74 , 75 ]. As a result, the 2009 update of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guideline update for PCI and the 2005 European Society of Cardiology Task Force recommend DES for ISR whether the initial stent was BMS or DES[ 76 - 78 ].…”
Section: Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…This analysis suggested that PCI with second-generation DES (EES) was the most effective treatment, whereas percutaneous coronary intervention with DEB was ranked as the second most effective treatment but without significant differences from first-generation DES. Two additional similar design meta-analyses have reported similar findings suggesting second generation DES as treatment of choice for BMS and DES-ISR[ 74 , 75 ]. As a result, the 2009 update of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guideline update for PCI and the 2005 European Society of Cardiology Task Force recommend DES for ISR whether the initial stent was BMS or DES[ 76 - 78 ].…”
Section: Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…Although ISR is less common after introduction of the DES, the treatment of ISR still remains a challenge [ 11 ]. It usually presents as recurrent angina and has often been managed by repeat percutaneous revascularization including balloon angioplasty with either a non-compliant or scoring balloon, DCB angioplasty, additional DES implantation, and surgical revascularization.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 Two additional similar design meta-analyses have reported similar findings. 10,11 In this issue of Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, Alfonso et al 12 presents a pooled analysis of the RIBS V (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) and RIBS IV (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) multicenter randomized trials, 6,7 comparing the efficacy of EES in patients with BMS-ISR and DES-ISR. The study detected clinical and morphological differences of ISR in BMS versus DES, including for the later more focal ISR pattern and delayed onset of presentation.…”
Section: See Article By Alfonso Et Almentioning
confidence: 99%