Comparison of Recurrent With First-Time In-Stent Restenosis

Recurrent in-stent restenosis (Re-ISR) remains a therapeutic challenge. We aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics, treatment, and long-term outcomes in patients with Re-ISR compared with those with first-time ISR (First-ISR). This retrospective study consecutively enrolled patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ISR in Fuwai Hospital between January 2017 and December 2018. Re-ISR was defined as a second event of ISR after a previous successful treatment of the ISR lesion. The primary outcome was defined as a composite of all-cause death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. A total of 2,006 patients (2,154 lesions) with ISR underwent successful PCI were enrolled and categorized into 2 groups: the Re-ISR group (246 patients/259 lesions) and the First-ISR group (1,760 patients/1,895 lesions). During a mean follow-up of 36 months, the primary outcomes occurred in 80 patients (32.5%) in the Re-ISR group and 349 patients (19.3%) in the First-ISR group (p <0.001 by log-rank test), major driven by spontaneous myocardial infarction (4.9% vs 2.7%, p = 0.049) and repeat revascularization (30.1% vs 16.5%, p <0.001). The multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that Re-ISR was independently associated with a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio 1.88, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.53, p <0.001) and repeated revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio 2.09, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 2.84, p <0.001). The relation remained consistent after the propensity score analysis. In conclusion, in the present cohort of patients who underwent PCI for ISR, Re-ISR was significantly associated with a higher risk of long-term outcomes than First-ISR.