title: Long-segment SFA stenting--the dark sides: in-stent restenosis, clinical deterioration, and stent fractures.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine and compare the rates of in-stent restenosis, late clinical deterioration, and stent fractures in nitinol stents versus Wallstents implanted for suboptimal angioplasty in the superficial femoral artery (SFA).
  
  
  METHODS
  Interrogation of an angioplasty database identified 286 consecutive patients (178 men; mean age 67+/-10 years, range 44-87) with severe claudication (n=254) or critical limb ischemia (n=32) who had stents implanted after suboptimal angioplasty over a 5-year period. Wallstents with a mean stented lesion length of 107+/-71 mm were implanted in 116 patients, while nitinol stents were used in 170 patients: 45 SMART stents (mean stented lesion length 139+/-88 mm) and 125 Dynalink/Absolute stents (mean stented lesion length 125+/-84 mm). Patients were followed for in-stent restenosis (>50%) by duplex ultrasound, clinical deterioration by at least 1 Fontaine stage compared to baseline, and stent fractures by biplanar radiography.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In-stent restenosis rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 46%, 66%, and 72% for Wallstents compared to 20%, 36%, and 53% for nitinol stents (p<0.001), respectively, without significant difference between the 2 nitinol stent groups (p=0.59). Clinical deterioration at 1, 2, and 3 years was found in 10%, 15%, and 18% with Wallstents versus 4%, 5%, and 5% with nitinol stents (p=0.014), respectively, without difference between the 2 nitinol stent groups (p=0.47). Fracture rates were 19% for Wallstents after a mean 43+/-24 months, 28% for SMART stents after mean 32+/-16 months, and 2% for Dynalink/Absolute stents after a mean 15+/-9 months.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Intermediate-term in-stent restenosis remains a major problem even with current nitinol stent technology; however, clinical deterioration seems no matter of serious concern with SMART and Dynalink/Absolute stents. Stent fractures may be lower with Dynalink/Absolute stents, but randomized head-to-head comparisons are needed to validate these data.
authors.affiliation: Department of Angiology, Medical University Vienna, Austria.
authors.forename: Oliver
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Schlager
authors.forename: Petra
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Dick
authors.forename: Schila
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Sabeti
authors.forename: Jasmin
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Amighi
authors.forename: Wolfgang
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Mlekusch
authors.forename: Erich
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Minar
authors.forename: Martin
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Schillinger
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000497:Alloys; D000800:Angioplasty, Balloon; D001157:Arterial Occlusive Diseases / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D019917:Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D005263:Femoral Artery / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D007866:Leg / Q000098:blood supply; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D016491:Peripheral Vascular Diseases / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D012008:Recurrence; D015607:Stents; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D018616:Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex; D014654:Vascular Patency
chemical_list: D000497:Alloys; C013616:nitinol