Skip to main content
Article
Stent fracture, an incidental finding or a significant marker of clinical in-stent restenosis?
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
  • Fareed Shaikh, Aurora Health Care
  • Rajesh Maddikunta, Aurora Health Care
  • Mohamed Djelmami-Hani, Aurora Health Care
  • Joaquin Solis, Aurora Health Care
  • Suhail Allaqaband, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Aurora Health Care
  • Tanvir Bajwa, Aurora Cardiovascular Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke’s Medical Centers, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health
Aurora Affiliations
Cardiovascular Disease Section, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke’s Medical Centers
Publication Date
4-1-2008
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The predictors and clinical significance for stent fracture (SF) in drug-eluting stents (DES) remain unknown. We identified procedural factors leading to SF and its clinical consequences in DES. METHODS: Percutaneous coronary interventions were performed on 3,920 patients with DES over 12 months. In-stent restenosis (ISR) of DES was observed in 188 cases with 121 cases (64.4%) receiving a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and 67 (35.6%) a paclitaxol-eluting stent (PES). RESULTS: SF was identified in 35 (18.6%) of the 188 cases. The 35 cases were then compared with 153 cases of ISR without angiographic evidence of SF. SF was identified in 29 (23.9%) SES compared with 6 (9.0%) in PES (P < 0.05). With univariate analysis, additional factors associated with SF included longer mean stented segment length, male gender, overlapping stents, vessel segment angulation >75 degrees , and more stents (all P < 0.05). With multivariate adjustment, three factors, i.e., stenting on a bend >75 degrees (OR = 13.8, 95%CI 3.7 to 51; P < 0.001), SES (OR = 4.1, 95%CI 1.3 to 13.4; P < 0.018) and overlapping stented segments (OR = 3.9, 95%CI 1.1 to 14.1; P < 0.041) were statistically significant independent predictors of SF while larger stent diameter was protective (OR = 0.14, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.70; P < 0.017). CONCLUSION: SF proved to be associated with angiographically-documented clinical ISR. Although the exact mechanism is unknown, factors that appear to play a negative role in SF include vessel tortuosity, use of SES and overlapping stents. Larger stent diameter was protective. Further studies are needed to better define the factors important in the mechanism of SF.
Document Type
Article
PubMed ID
18360853
DOI
10.1002/ccd.21371
Citation Information
Shaikh F, Maddikunta R, Djelmami-Hani M, et al. Stent fracture, an incidental finding or a significant marker of clinical in-stent restenosis? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Apr 1;71(5):614-8.