IVUS: Post-Evaluation After Stenting



Fig. 7.1
A representative images showing stent symmetry and eccentricity . Minimum and maximum stent diameters with 1 mm interval over the length of the device were shown. Stent (Xience alpine, 3.5 × 15 mm) showed symmetric and concentric expansion



Eccentricity index (EI) was calculated as minimum stent diameter/maximum stent diameter to show the circularity of the cross section. Therefore, the calculation of minimum and maximum stent diameters were derived from the same cross section frame by frame and value was expressed as an average. A stent with EI ≥ 0.7 was defined as concentric while EI < 0.7 was defined as eccentric [7, 8]. The eccentricity of DES had been previously considered as one of the factors for restenosis, because of the higher possibility of the uneven diffusion of the drug into the arterial wall [9]. However, subsequent reports showed that eccentricity of DES did not have any clinical impact because DES powerfully suppressed the neointimal formation [8, 10].



7.3 Measurement of Minimal Stent Area


Minimal stent area (MSA ) of bare metal stent (BMS) for long-term patency was considered as 6.4–6.5 mm2 [11, 12], and adequate post-interventional MSA of DES was 5.0–5.7 mm2 (Fig. 7.2) [1315]. In left main lesions, optimal MSA was reported as 8.7 mm2 in the MAIN-COMPARE (revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison of percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus surgical revascularization) study [2]. Considering 4 segments of left main bifurcation, the best minimal stent area criteria to predict angiographic restenosis were 5.0 mm2 (ostial left circumflex artery), 6.3 mm2 (ostial left anterior descending artery), 7.2 mm2 (polygon of confluence [POC]), and 8.2 mm2 (proximal left main artery above the POC) (Fig. 7.3) [16].

A430616_1_En_7_Fig2_HTML.gif


Fig. 7.2
Minimal stent area (MSA) to prevent in-stent restenosis or target vessel revascularization. Best cutoff of bare metal stent (BMS) was 6.4–6.5 mm2 and the value of drug-eluting stent (DES) was 5.0–5.7 mm2. In case of left main coronary artery (LMCA), 8.7 mm2 was suggested


A430616_1_En_7_Fig3_HTML.gif


Fig. 7.3
Minimal stent area (MSA) for left main bifurcation lesion. Considering 4 segments of left main bifurcation, the best MSA criteria were 5.0 mm2 (ostial left circumflex artery), 6.3 mm2 (ostial left anterior descending artery), 7.2 mm2 (polygon of confluence [POC]), and 8.2 mm2 (proximal left main artery above the POC)


7.4 Evaluation of Stent Expansion (Well Expansion vs. Underexpansion)


In the BMS era, MUSIC study (multicenter ultrasound stenting in coronaries study) defined adequate expansion as >90% of the average reference cross-sectional area (CSA), or >100% of a smaller reference CSA with complete apposition and symmetric expansion [4]. CRUISE (Can Routine Ultrasound Influence Stent Expansion) study showed better stent expansion of IVUS-guided PCI than angiography-guided PCI, especially in terms of target vessel revascularization (TVR), but not in mortality or myocardial infarction [17]. In contrast to the BMS era, early studies of IVUS-guided PCI with DES had no significant benefit in terms of TVR or clinical events. AVIO (Angiography Versus IVUS Optimization) study which defined optimal stent expansion as final minimum stent CSA of at least 70% of the hypothetical CSA of the fully inflated balloon used for post-dilatation did not show any difference in clinical outcome [18]. However, attention should be paid to avoid stent underexpansion. Several evidences indicate that stent underexpansion is one of the major causes of stent failure such as stent restenosis or stent thrombosis (Table 7.1) [14, 1921]. ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) study showed reduction in stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and major adverse cardiac events by IVUS-guided optimization of stent expansion and apposition [22]. Representative IVUS images of underexpansion and well expansion are shown in Fig. 7.4.


Table 7.1
Underexpansion as the predictor of DES thrombosis and restenosis


































Study

Stent type

No. of lesion

Minimal stent area

Fujii K, et al. [19]

Sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher)

15 in ST group vs. 45 in control group

4.3 ± 1.6 mm2 in ST group vs. 6.2 ± 1.9 mm2 in control group

Okabe T, et al. [20]

Sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher), paclitaxel-eluting stent (Taxus)

14 in ST group vs. 30 in control group

4.6 ± 1.1 mm2 in ST group vs. 5.6 ± 1.7 mm2 in control group

Liu X, et al. [21]

Sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher), paclitaxel-eluting stent (Taxus)

20 in ST group vs. 50 in ISR group vs. 50 in control group

3.9 ± 1.0 mm2 in ST group vs. 5.0 ± 1.7 mm2 in ISR group vs. 6.0 ± 1.6 mm2 in control group

Hong MK, et al. [14]

Sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher)

21 in ISR group vs. 522 in control group

5.1 ± 1.5 mm2 in ISR group vs. 6.5 ± 1.9 mm2 in control group


DES drug-eluting stent, ST stent thrombosis, ISR in-stent restenosis


A430616_1_En_7_Fig4_HTML.jpg


Fig. 7.4
A representative images of stent underexpansion and well expansion. A 53-year-old man was admitted with stable angina. The coronary angiogram (CAG) showed significant stenosis (dotted line) on mid and distal right coronary artery (RCA) (a). Two drug-eluting stents (Ultimaster 3.0 × 33 mm on mid RCA and Ultimaster 2.75 × 18 mm on distal RCA) were implanted separately and CAG after stent implantation showed stent underexpansion on distal RCA (b, arrow). Corresponding intravascular ultrasound image showed minimal stent area (MSA) of 2.57 mm2 (b1). After additional dilation with noncompliant balloon, CAG showed well expansion of distal stent (c, arrow) and MSA was increased as 5.06 mm2 (c1)


7.5 Detection of Stent Edge Dissection


Stent edge dissection is a tear in the plaque parallel to the vessel wall with visualization of blood flow in the false lumen <5 mm to a stent edge. The incidence of edge dissections by IVUS is approximately 10–20% and 40% of the IVUS-identified dissections was not detected by angiography [2325]. Significant (major) edge dissections, defined by IVUS as lumen area < 4 mm2 or dissection angle ≥60°, have been associated with early stent thrombosis [26]. However, minor non-flow-limiting dissection at the edge of stent may not be associated with an increased incidence of clinical events although no consensus exists on an optimal strategy. Figure 7.5 is an example of stent edge dissection.

A430616_1_En_7_Fig5_HTML.jpg


Fig. 7.5
A case of stent edge dissection . A 60-year-old woman with stable angina showed calcified stenotic lesion (dotted line) on mid-right coronary artery (a). The coronary angiogram after drug-eluting stent implantation showed small dissection on proximal stent edge (b, arrow). Dissection flap (asterisk) was observed by intravascular ultrasound (c)


7.6 Detection of Acute Incomplete Stent Apposition


Incomplete stent apposition (ISA) , synonymous with stent malapposition, was defined as the absence of contact between at least one strut and the lumen wall that did not overlap a side branch with evidence of blood speckle behind the strut and can occur acutely after stent implantation (acute ISA) or develop over time (late-acquired ISA). Acute ISA is almost due to suboptimal stent deployment. The frequency of acute ISA has been reported to be nearly 10% and it appears not to be associated with increased cardiac events [27, 28].


7.7 Detection of Tissue Protrusion (Plaque Prolapse and Intra-stent Thrombus)


Tissue protrusion (TP ) was defined as a visible tissue extrusion through the stent struts by IVUS (Fig. 7.6) [29, 30]. Although thrombus was characterized by heterogeneous echodensity tissue with a sparkling pattern by IVUS [31], the accurate discrimination of atherosclerotic plaque and thrombus within stent is very difficult because of limited resolution of IVUS. Thus, TP includes plaque and/or thrombus extrusion within stent [32]. The incidence of TP has been reported in various ranges between 20% and 73%, depended on characteristics of enrolled patients (Table 7.2) [29, 30, 3236]. In fact, TP is likely to develop in patients with acute coronary syndrome, especially ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction owing to a higher chance of thrombus or friable plaque compared to stable patients [32, 35] and receiving longer stent probably caused by unequal distribution of inflation pressure during stent deployment [30, 34]. Other predictors of TP are larger reference lumen area, greater plaque burden, more plaque rupture, attenuated plaque, positive vascular remodeling, and virtual histology thin-cap fibroatheroma by IVUS [30, 32]. The clinical impact of TP remains a controversy. Previous studies suggested that TP after stent implantation may increase the risk of stent thrombosis [26, 37]. Other studies, however, have been failed to show this relationship [29, 32, 38].

A430616_1_En_7_Fig6_HTML.jpg


Fig. 7.6
Representative cases of tissue protrusion . A 65-year-old man was admitted with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (a). The coronary angiogram (CAG) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation showed no luminal narrowing within stented segments (a1, arrow). Correspondingly, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) revealed tissue protrusion (plaque and/or thrombus) between stent struts (a2, arrowheads). A 55-year-old woman was admitted with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (b). The CAG after DES implantation showed mild luminal narrowing within stented segments (b1, arrow). Correspondingly, IVUS revealed tissue protrusion (most likely thrombus) between stent struts (b2, arrowheads)



Table 7.2
Summary of tissue protrusion after stent implantation












































































Study

Patients/lesions

% of TP

% of ACS (% of STEMI)

Cardiac enzyme elevation

% of peri-procedural MI

% of stent thrombosis

Clinical outcomes (TP vs. non-TP)

Sohn J, et al. [29]

38/40

45%

65.8% (18.4%)

Yes

5.3%

0%

2-year MACE: no difference

Choi SY, et al. [26] (HORIZON-AMI IVUS substudy)

401/401

73.6%

100% (100%)

NA

NA

Early: 3.4%

1-year clinical events: no difference

Hong YJ, et al. [37]

418/418

34%

100% (37.1%)

Yes

NA

Acute: 3.5%

Subacute: 4.2%

1-year cardiac death, MI, TVR: no difference

Maehara A, et al. [48]

286/286

27.3%

39.1% (0%)

NA

NA

NA

NA

Qiu F, et al. [32] (ADAPT-DES)

2072/2446

34.3%

58.5% (17.9%)

Yes

1.8%

0.6%

2-year cardiac death, MI, ST: no difference

Shimohama T, et al. [36]

183/199

19.1%

12.7% (NA)

NA

NA

NA

9-month TLR: 3.3%


TP tissue protrusion, ACS acute coronary syndrome, STEMI ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, MACE major adverse cardiac events, TVR target vessel revascularization, ST stent thrombosis, TLR target lesion revascularization

Although some investigators demonstrated greater cardiac enzyme elevation after stent implantation in patients with TP, it did not translate into the increased risk of stent thrombosis or periprocedural myocardial infarction [30, 32]. An IVUS substudy from ADAPT-DES reported the 2-year clinical outcomes of TP after stenting. At 2-year clinical follow-up, there was no difference in the rate of major adverse cardiac events between patients with or without TP. Interestingly, patients with TP showed a less frequency of clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 2 years (1.9% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.008), probably due to larger minimal stent area at the end of procedure [32]. Taken together, TP may influence the early clinical phase rather than late clinical stage after stent implantation even though its clinical significance is still uncertain.

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Jan 19, 2018 | Posted by in CARDIOLOGY | Comments Off on IVUS: Post-Evaluation After Stenting

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access