Comparison of Coronary Restenosis Rates in Matched Patients With Versus Without Diabetes Mellitus

Peter W. Radke, Klara Friese, Andrea Buhr, Bernard Nagel, Lars Christian Harland, Axel Kaiser, Marko Remmel, Peter Hanrath, Heribert Schunkert, Rainer Hoffmann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

19 Scopus citations

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an established risk factor for stent restenosis, in part as a result of the smaller vessel dimensions and longer lesions. This study compared the magnitude of acute lumen gain and late lumen loss after elective coronary stent implantation in patients with and without DM using a matched-pair analysis. A total of 133 patients with DM and 192 coronary lesions were included in this analysis. A group of 192 lesions in 182 patients without DM were matched in a pairwise fashion, stratifying for reference diameter, minimal luminal diameter, and lesion length. The binary restenosis rate at the 5-month follow-up angiography was 25% in the DM group and 14% in the non-DM group (p <0.01). Acute angiographic lumen gain (1.47 ± 0.41 vs 1.56 ± 0.38 mm, p = 0.03) and late lumen loss (0.64 ± 0.42 vs 0.55 ± 0.36 mm, p = 0.02) were significantly different between the DM and non-DM groups. In conclusion, suboptimal acute procedural results and an exaggerated neointimal proliferation contributed by about 50% to the lower net lumen gain in the DM group. Patients with DM had a significantly higher restenosis rate even when matched for preprocedural angiographic lesion dimensions. Mechanistically, inferior procedural results, as well as exaggerated neointimal proliferation, are, quantitatively, equally important in this process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1218-1222
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume98
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Nov 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Coronary Restenosis Rates in Matched Patients With Versus Without Diabetes Mellitus'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this