Novel approaches for the prevention of restenosis
Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs, ISSN: 1354-3784, Vol: 9, Issue: 11, Page: 2555-2578
2000
- 17Citations
- 16Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations17
- Citation Indexes17
- 17
- CrossRef11
- Captures16
- Readers16
- 16
Review Description
Restenosis, the re-narrowing of the lumen of the coronary artery, in the months following a successful percutaneous balloon angioplasty or stenting, remains the main limitation to percutaneous coronary revascularisation. Serial intravascular ultrasound studies have shown that restenosis after conventional balloon angioplasty represents a complex interplay between elastic recoil, smooth muscle proliferation and vascular remodelling, while restenosis after stent deployment is due almost entirely to smooth muscle hyperplasia and matrix proliferation. Despite intensive investigation in animal models and in clinical trials, most pharmacological agents have been found to be ineffective in preventing restenosis after percutaneous balloon angioplasty or stenting. Although studies frequently report success in the suppression of neointimal proliferation in animal models of balloon vascular injury, few of them have been successful in clinical trials. Lately, the advent of endovascular radiation, new antiproliferative agents, recombinant DNA, growth factor regulators and novel local drug delivery systems have shown promising results. In the past five years, intracoronary radiation with γ- and β-emitting sources has been evaluated intensively with very encouraging results. This is the first potent non-pharmacological approach that has been successful in a large number of patients in controlling excessive tissue proliferation. It is very likely that a combination of stents and pharmacological and/or non-pharmacological inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia will likely result in further reductions in the incidence if restenosis. The continued attractiveness of percutaneous coronary revascularisation, as an alternative to medical treatment or bypass surgery for patients with coronary artery disease, will depend upon our ability to control the restenosis process. Due to the vast literature on the subject, this review will focus mainly on clinical trials that show the most promise and will highlight those that warrant further investigation.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know