[Edge effect and late thrombosis -- inevitable complications of vascular brachytherapy?]
- PMID: 12442189
- DOI: 10.1007/s00392-002-0840-0
[Edge effect and late thrombosis -- inevitable complications of vascular brachytherapy?]
Abstract
Restenosis is the limiting entity after percutaneous coronary angioplasty. Vascular brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis has been shown to reduce the repeat restenosis rate and the incidence of major adverse events in several randomized trials. Besides the beneficial effects, brachytherapy yielded some unwanted side effects. The development of new stenoses at the edges of the target lesion treated with radiation is termed edge effect. It occurs after afterloading brachytherapy as well as after implantation of radioactive stents. It is characterized by extensive intimal hyperplasia and negative remodeling. As contributing factors the axial dose fall-off, inherent to all radioactive sources, and the application of vessel wall trauma by angioplasty have been identified. The combination of both factors, by insufficient overlap of the radiation length over the injured vessel segment, has been referred to as geographic miss. It has been shown to be associated with a very high incidence of the edge effect. Avoidance of geographic miss is strongly recommended in vascular brachytherapy procedures. Late thrombosis after vascular brachytherapy is of multifactorial origin. It comprises platelet recruitment, fibrin deposition, disturbed vasomotion, non-healing dissection and stent malapposition predisposing to turbulent blood flow. The strongest predictors for late thrombosis are premature discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy and implantation of new stents during the brachytherapy procedure. With a consequent and prolonged antiplatelet therapy, the incidence of late thrombosis has been reduced to placebo levels. Edge effect and late thrombosis represent unwanted side effects of vascular brachytherapy. By means of a thorough treatment planning and prolonged antiplatelet therapy their incidences can be largely reduced. With regard to the very favorable net effect, they do not constitute relevant limitations of vascular brachytherapy.
Similar articles
-
Late stent thrombosis in brachytherapy: the role of long-term antiplatelet therapy.J Invasive Cardiol. 2002 Mar;14(3):109-14. J Invasive Cardiol. 2002. PMID: 11870263 Review.
-
[Optimal platelet inhibition after coronary stent implantation. Current status].Herz. 2008 Jun;33(4):244-53. doi: 10.1007/s00059-008-3138-9. Herz. 2008. PMID: 18581073 Review. German.
-
Poor outcome in patients treated with brachytherapy for diffuse in-stent restenosis. The role of additional stenting despite prolonged antiplatelet therapy.J Invasive Cardiol. 2005 Nov;17(11):598-602. J Invasive Cardiol. 2005. PMID: 16264205
-
Intracoronary brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis using long sources reduces restenosis.J Invasive Cardiol. 2005 Jun;17(6):302-6. J Invasive Cardiol. 2005. PMID: 16003004
-
Vascular brachytherapy: applications in the era of drug-eluting stents.Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2002;3 Suppl 5:S23-30. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2002. PMID: 12478232 Review.
Cited by
-
Current understanding of coronary in-stent restenosis. Pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up, and management.Z Kardiol. 2005 Nov;94(11):772-90. doi: 10.1007/s00392-005-0299-x. Z Kardiol. 2005. PMID: 16258781 Review.
-
Angiographic and clinical outcome for the treatment of in-stent restenosis with sirolimus-eluting stent compared to vascular brachytherapy.Z Kardiol. 2005 Jun;94(6):405-10. doi: 10.1007/s00392-005-0253-y. Z Kardiol. 2005. PMID: 15940441 Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials