Journal List > Korean Circ J > v.37(6) > 1016225

TOOLS
Lim, Kim, Kum, Kim, Kim, Lee, Park, Cha, Kim, Kim, and Song: The Effect of a New Carbon Stent for Preventing Restenosis-Prospective, Randomized Study for Preventing Metal Allergy
Original Article
Korean Circulation Journal

Korean Circulation Journal 2007; 37(6): 258-264.

Published online: 30 June 2007

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2007.37.6.258

The Effect of a New Carbon Stent for Preventing Restenosis-Prospective, Randomized Study for Preventing Metal Allergy

Tae Hyung Lim, MD1, Moo Hyun Kim, MD2, Dong Sung Kum, MD2, Hye Jin Kim, RN2, Hyung Kwon Kim, MD2, Soo Keol Lee, MD2, Tae Ho Park, MD2, Kwang Soo Cha, MD2, Young Dae Kim, MD2, Hong Seok Kim, MD3, Ki Hoon Song, MD3

1Department of Internal Medicine, Hae Dong Hospital, Busan, Korea.

2Department of Internal Medicine, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.

3Department of Dermatology, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.

Corresponding author (kimmh@dau.ac.kr)

Received 22 February 2007       Accepted 22 April 2007

© 2007, The Korean Society of Circulation

Abstract

Background and Objectives

Metal allergy has been reported to be related to stent restenosis. Therefore, we sought to investigate the incidence of metal allergy with new carbon stent with ion implantation technique and its relationship to restenosis.

Subjects and Methods

Between April 2002 and June 2004, 128 patients (100 male, mean age 60±10 years) were included in this study. The clinical diagnoses of the study patients included 64 acute myocardial infarction, 24 unstable angina and 40 stable angina patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either an Arthos Inert Stent (the study group) or an Arthos stent (the control group), with follow-up angiography scheduled 6 months later. Three months after stent implantation, skin patch tests, for the detection of metal allergies, were performed with manganese, molybdenum, nickel and chromium.

Results

There were no differences between the age, genders, risk factors and multi-vessel involvement between the two groups, as well as no differences in the angiographic parameters and restenosis (p>0.05). There were no differences in the positive rates of the skin tests between the Arthos stent and Arthos Inert stent groups or between the restenosis and no-restenosis groups (p>0.05).

Conclusion

The new carbon stent, with ion implantation, did not reduce coronary restenosis. An allergic reaction was not related to the stent technology or stent restenosis.

Keywords: Coronary artery disease, Stents, Coronary restenosis, Patch tests

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1
Diagram of the study design.
kcj-37-258-g001
Fig. 2
Preparation for finn chamber on scanpor tape method. In 4 chamber, 4 different allergens were included with one control chamber without allergen.
kcj-37-258-g002
Fig. 3
Examples of positive and negative skin test. Left showed positive case of skin change at day 2 (+++) continue at day 4 (+) after allergen removal. Right showed negative case showing a nonspecific irritant reaction, which was originally positive change at day 2 (+), but not persisted at day 4 (-).
kcj-37-258-g003
Fig. 4
Positivity of skin test regarding to each test material (left) and single or multiple positivities (right) after stent implantation. Cr: chromium, Ni: nickel, Mn: manganese, Mo: molybdenum, p: number of positivity.
kcj-37-258-g004
Table 1
Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics of the study patients
kcj-37-258-i001

AMI: acute myocardial infarction, LAD: left anterior descending artery, LCx: left circumflex artery, RCA: right coronary artery

Table 2
Clinical and angiographic characteristics between Arthos stent & Arthos inert stent groups
kcj-37-258-i002

AMI: acute myocardial infarction, LAD: left anterior descending artery, LCx: left circumflex artery, RCA: right coronary artery, RD: reference diameter, MLD: minimal luminal diameter, DS: diameter stenosis

Table 3
Clinical and angiographic characteristics between no restenosis and restenosis group
kcj-37-258-i003

References

1. Gruentzig A. Transluminal dilatation of coronary artery stenosis (letter). Lancet. 1978. 1:263.
2. Schwartz RS, Murphy JG, Edward WD, Camrud AR, Vliestra RE, Holmes DR. Restenosis after balloon angioplasty: a practical proliperative model in the porcine coronary arteries. Circulation. 1990. 82:2190–2200.
3. Kim MH. Coronary Intervention and Restenosis. Korean Circ J. 1999. 29:543–545.
4. Alexander RW. Inflammation and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1994. 331:468–469.
5. Kollum M, Kaiser S, Kinscherf ATVB, et al. Apoptosis after stent implantation compared with balloon angioplasty in rabits. Role of macrophages. Arterioscler Thromb Vacs Biol. 1997. 17:2383–2388.
6. Kastrti A, Schomig A, Dirschinger J, et al. Increased risk of restenosis after placement of gold-coated stents with uncoated steel stents in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2000. 101:2478–2483.
7. Kanerval L, Sipilamen MT, Estlander T, Zitting A, Jolanki R, Tarvainen K. Nickel release from metals, and a case of allergic contact dermatitis from stainless steel. Contact Dermatitis. 1994. 31:299–303.
8. San Martin M, Barranco Sanz P, Lopez Serrano MC, Contreras Porta J. Allergy to dental prosthesis. Allergy. 1997. 52:690–691.
9. Koster R, Vieluf D, Kiehn M, et al. Nickel and molybdenum contact allergies in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Lancet. 2000. 356:1895–1897.
10. Kim MH, Cha KS, Kim JS. Transradial Interventions in Coronary Artery Disease: Comparison with Transfemoral Interventions. Korean Circ J. 1998. 28:1941–1952.
11. Hillen U, Haude M, Erbel R, Goos M. Evaluation of metal allergies in patients with coronary stents. Contact dermatitis. 2002. 47:353–356.
12. Freigert S. Manual of contact dermatitis. 1981. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munkguaard.
13. Tanigawa N, Sawada S, Kobayashi M. Reaction of the aortic wall to six metallic stent materials. Acad Radiol. 1995. 2:379–384.
14. Edelman ER, Seifert P, Groothuis A, et al. Gold-coated NIR stents in porcine coronary arteries. Circulation. 2001. 103:429–434.
15. McKenna CJ, Camrud AR, Sangiorgi G, et al. Fibrin-film stenting in a porcine coronary injury model: efficacy and safety compared with uncoated stent. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998. 31:1434–1438.
16. van der Giessen WJ, Lincoff AM, Schwartz RS, et al. Marked inflammatory sequelae to implantation of biodegradable and nonbiodegradable polymers in porcine coronary arteries. Circulation. 1996. 94:1690–1697.
17. Guthensohn K, Baythien C, Bau J, Fenner T, Grewe P, Koester R. In vitro analyses of diamond-like carbon coated stent. Reduction of metal ion release, platelet activation, and thrombogenecity. Thromb Res. 2000. 15:577–585.
18. Svedman C, Tillman C, Gustavsson CG, Moller H, Frennby B, Bruze M. Contact allergy to gold in patients with gold-plated intracoronary stents. Contact Dermatitis. 2005. 52:192–196.
19. Kim YH, Lee CW, Hong MK, et al. Randomized comparison of carbon ion-implanted stent versus bare metal stent in coronary artery disease: The Asian pacific MulticenterArthos Stent Study (PASS) trial. Am Heart J. 2005. 149:336–341.
20. Iijima R, Ikari Y, Amiya E, et al. The impact of metallic allergy on stent implantation: metal allergy and recurrence of restenosis. Int J Cardiol. 2005. 104:319–325.
TOOLS
Similar articles