Advertisement

Cardiac outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome attributable to calcified nodule

      Highlights

      • Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients attributable to calcified nodule (CN) exhibited significant heightened risk of adverse cardiac events compared to those without.
      • In ACS patients attributable to calcified nodule, recurrence of ACS occurred mainly due to in-stent restenosis.
      • Over 80% of in-stent restenosis at lesions containing CN exhibited its re-appearance within the implanted stent. .
      • Our findings suggest the need for additional therapeutic approach to modify CN in ACS subjects. .

      Abstract

      Background and aims

      Calcified nodule (CN) is an eruptive calcified mass causing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Since coronary calcification is associated with an elevated cardiac event's risk, ACS attributable to CN may exhibit worse clinical outcome following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

      Methods

      We retrospectively analyzed 657 ACS patients receiving PCI with newer-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation under intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance. CN was defined as (1) protruding calcification with its irregular surface and (2) the presence of calcification at adjacent proximal and distal segments. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac event [MACE = cardiac death + ACS recurrence + target lesion revascularization (TLR)].

      Results

      CN was identified in 5.3% (=35/657) of the study subjects. CN patients were more likely to have coronary risk factors including hypertension (p = 0.005), chronic kidney disease (p < 0.001), maintenance hemodialysis (p < 0.001) and a history of PCI (p < 0.001). During the observational period (median = 1304 days), CN was associated with an increased risk of MACE (HR = 7.68, 95%CI = 4.61–12.80, p < 0.001), ACS recurrence (HR = 12.32, 95%CI = 6.05–25.11, p < 0.001) and TLR (HR = 10.48, 95%CI = 5.80–18.94, p < 0.001). These cardiac risks related to CN were consistently observed by Cox proportional hazards model (MACE: p < 0.001, ACS recurrence: p < 0.001, TLR: p < 0.001) and a propensity score–matched cohort analysis (MACE: p = 0.002, ACS recurrence: p = 0.01, TLR: p = 0.005). Of note, over 80% of TLR at the CN lesion was driven by its re-appearance within the implanted DES.

      Conclusions

      ACS patients attributable to CN have an increased risk of ACS recurrence and TLR, mainly driven by the continuous growth and protrusion of the calcified mass.

      Graphical abstract

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Atherosclerosis
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Virmani R.
        • Kolodgie F.D.
        • Burke A.P.
        • Farb A.
        • et al.
        Lessons from sudden coronary death: a comprehensive morphological classification scheme for atherosclerotic lesions.
        Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 2000; 20: 1262-1275https://doi.org/10.1161/01.atv.20.5.1262
        • Sakakura K.
        • Nakano M.
        • Otsuka F.
        • et al.
        Pathophysiology of atherosclerosis plaque progression.
        Heart Lung Circ. 2013; 22: 399-411https://doi.org/10.1016/j-hlc.2013.03.001
        • Kobayashi Y.
        • Okura H.
        • Kume T.
        • et al.
        Impact of target lesion coronary calcification on stent expansion.
        Circ. J. 2014; 78: 2209-2214https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.cj-14-0108
        • Neumann F.J.
        • Sousa-Uva M.
        • Ahlsson A.
        • et al.
        ESC/EATS Guideliens on myocardial revascularization.
        Eur. Heart J. 2018; 2019: 87-165https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394
        • Torii S.
        • Jinnouchi H.
        • Sakamoto A.
        • et al.
        Vascular responses to coronary calcification following implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents in humans: impact on healing.
        Eur. Heart J. 2020; 41: 786-796https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz850
        • Onuma Y.
        • Tanimoto S.
        • Ruygrok P.
        • et al.
        Efficacy of everolimus eluting stent implantation in patients with calcified coronary culprit lesions: two-year angiographic and three-year clinical results from the SPIRIT II study.
        Cathet. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2010; 76: 634-642https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.22541
        • Nishida K.
        • Nakatsuma K.
        • Shiomi H.
        • et al.
        Second-generation vs. First-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with calcified coronary lesions- pooled analysis from the RESET and NEXT trials.
        Circ. J. 2018; 82: 376-387https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-17-0746
        • Lee J.B.
        • Mintz G.S.
        • Lisauskas J.B.
        • et al.
        Histopathologic validation of the intravascular ultrasound diagnosis of calcified coronary artery nodules.
        Am. J. Cardiol. 2011; 108: 1547-1551https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.07.014
        • Thygesen K.
        • Alpert J.S.
        • Jaffe A.S.
        • et al.
        Third universal definition of myocardial infarction.
        J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2012; 60: 1581-1598https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.001
        • Choi S.Y.
        • Maehara A.
        • Cristea E.
        • et al.
        Usefulness of minimum stent cross sectional area as a predictor of angiographic restenosis after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction (from the HORIZONS-AMI Trial IVUS substudy).
        Am. J. Cardiol. 2012; 109: 455-460https://doi.org/10.1016/j-amjcard.2011.10.005
        • Brugaletta S.
        • Gomez-Lara J.
        • Diletti R.
        • et al.
        Comparison of in vivo eccentricity and symmetry indices between metallic stents and bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: insights from the ABSORB and SPIRIT trials.
        Cathet. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2012; 79: 219-228https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.22996
        • Mori H.
        • Finn A.V.
        • Atkinson J.B.
        • Lutter C.
        • et al.
        Calcified nodule: an early and late cause of in-stent failure.
        JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2016; 9: e125-e126https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2015.01.038
        • Otsuka F.
        • Byrne R.A.
        • Yahagi K.
        • et al.
        Neoatherosclerosis: overview of histopathologic findings and implications for intravascular imaging assessment.
        Eur. Heart J. 2015; 36: 2147-2159https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv247
        • Otsuka F.
        • Vorpahl M.
        • Nakano M.
        • Foerst J.
        • et al.
        Pathology of second-generation everolimus-eluting stents versus first-generation sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents in humans.
        Circulation. 2014; 129: 211-223https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.001790
        • Lee T.
        • Mintz G.S.
        • Matsumura M.
        • et al.
        Prevalence, predictors, and clinical presentation of a calcified nodule as assessed by optical coherence tomography.
        JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017; 10: 883-891https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.05.013
        • Jia H.
        • Abtahian F.
        • Aguirre A.D.
        • Lee S.
        • et al.
        In vivo diagnosis of plaque erosion and calcified nodule in patients with acute coronary syndrome by intravascular optical coherence tomography.
        J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2013; 62: 1748-1758https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.05.071
        • Iwai T.
        • Kataoka Y.
        • Otsuka F.
        • et al.
        Chronic kidney disease and coronary atherosclerosis: evidences from intravascular imaging.
        Expert Rev. Cardiovasc Ther. 2019; 17: 707-716https://doi.org/10.1080/14779072.2019.1676150

      Linked Article