Skip to main content
Log in

Angiographic Segment Size in Patients Referred for Coronary Intervention is Influenced by Constitutional, Anatomical, and Clinical Features

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Factors influencing the size of target vessels of patients referred for coronary intervention are poorly defined. We aimed to investigate in a large series of patients undergoing percutaneous intervention the relation of constitutional, anatomical, and clinical features with the reference diameter of coronary vessels treated with stenting.

Methods

A total of 4,850 de novo coronary lesions, non-ostial and non-bifurcational, located in native vessels were analyzed. The following pre-specified characteristics were analyzed to reflect the relation between constitutional, anatomical, and clinical features on reference vessel diameter: age, gender, height, weight, proximal location, vessel, diabetes, hypertension, multivessel disease, and clinical presentation.

Results

The average reference diameter was 2.66  ±  0.50 mm. All pre-specified markers had a significant relation with the vessel reference diameter at univariate analysis, except by hypertension which showed a strong tendency. However, at multivariate analysis, only diabetes, proximal location, multivessel disease, clinical presentation, vessel, weight, and height were identified as independent predictors of reference vessel diameter.

Conclusion

Reference diameter of coronary vessels at the site of lesions treated by stenting is significantly influenced by a variety of characteristics. We hypothesize that the treated segment size of patients undergoing stenting ultimately reflects the conjoint effect of several different factors, including constitutional, anatomical, and clinical features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akiyama T, Moussa I, Reimers B et al (1998) Angiographic and clinical outcome following coronary stenting of small vessels: a comparison with coronary stenting of large vessels. J Am Coll Cardiol 32:1610–1618

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Saucedo JF, Popma JJ, Kennard ED et al (2000) Relation of coronary artery size to one-year clinical events after new device angioplasty of native coronary arteries (a New Approach to Coronary Intervention [NACI] Registry Report). Am J Cardiol 85:166–171

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Elezi S, Kastrati A, Neumann FJ et al (1998) Vessel size and long-term outcome after coronary stent placement. Circulation 98:1875–1880

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Foley DP, Melkert R, Serruys PW (1994) Influence of coronary vessel size on renarrowing process and late angiographic outcome after successful balloon angioplasty. Circulation 90:1239–1251

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schunkert H, Harrell L, Palacios IF (1999) Implications of small reference vessel diameter in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization. J␣Am Coll Cardiol 34:40–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lemos PA, Hoye A, Goedhart D et al (2004) Clinical, angiographic, and procedural predictors of angiographic restenosis after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in complex patients: an evaluation from the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) study. Circulation 109:1366–1370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sheifer SE, Canos MR, Weinfurt KP et al (2000) Sex differences in coronary artery size assessed by intravascular ultrasound. Am Heart J 139:649–653

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Litovsky SH, Farb A, Burke AP et al (1996) Effect of age, race, body surface area, heart weight and atherosclerosis on coronary artery dimensions in young males. Atherosclerosis 123:243–250

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dodge JT, Jr, Brown BG, Bolson EL et al (1992) Lumen diameter of normal human coronary arteries. Influence of age, sex, anatomic variation, and left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation. Circulation 86:232–246

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Briguori C, Tobis J, Nishida T et al (2002) Discrepancy between angiography and intravascular ultrasound when analysing small coronary arteries. Eur Heart J␣23:247–254

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kalbfleisch H, Hort W (1977) Quantitative study on the size of coronary artery supplying areas postmortem. Am Heart J 94:183–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. O’Keefe JH Jr, Owen RM, Bove AA (1987) Influence of left ventricular mass on coronary artery cross-sectional area. Am J Cardiol 59:1395–1397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Villari B, Hess OM, Moccetti D et al (1992) Effect of progression of left ventricular hypertrophy on coronary artery dimensions in aortic valve disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 20:1073–1079

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Vassalli G, Hess OM, Krogmann ON et al (1993) Coronary artery size in mitral regurgitation and its regression after mitral valve surgery. Am Heart J␣126:1091–1098

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nitenberg A, Antony I (1996) Epicardial coronary arteries are not adequately sized in hypertensive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 27:115–123

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Mosseri M, Zolti E, Rozenman Y et al (1997) The diameter of the epicardial coronary arteries in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. Int J Cardiol 62:133–141

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Reiber JH, Serruys PW, Kooijman CJ et al (1985) Assessment of short-, medium-, and long-term variations in arterial dimensions from computer-assisted quantitation of coronary cineangiograms. Circulation 71:280–288

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Regar E, Serruys PW, Bode C et al (2002) Angiographic findings of the multicenter Randomized Study With the Sirolimus-Eluting Bx Velocity Balloon-Expandable Stent (RAVEL): sirolimus-eluting stents inhibit restenosis irrespective of the vessel size. Circulation 106:1949–1956

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang JC, Normand SL, Mauri L et al (2004) Coronary artery spatial distribution of acute myocardial infarction occlusions. Circulation 110:278–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. De Bruyne B, Hersbach F, Pijls NH et al (2001) Abnormal epicardial coronary resistance in patients with diffuse atherosclerosis but “Normal” coronary angiography. Circulation 104:2401–2406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kornowski R, Mintz GS, Lansky AJ et al (1998) Paradoxic decreases in atherosclerotic plaque mass in insulin-treated diabetic patients. Am J Cardiol 81:1298–1304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Lemos PA, Arampatzis CA, Saia F et al (2004) Treatment of very small vessels with 2.25-mm diameter sirolimus-eluting stents (from the RESEARCH registry). Am J Cardiol 93:633–636

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lemos PA, Martinez EE, Quintella E et al (2002) Stenting vs. balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting for the treatment of vessels with small reference diameter. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 55:309–314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lesperance J, Bourassa MG, Schwartz L et al (1993) Definition and measurement of restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty: implications for clinical trials. Am Heart J 125:1394–1408

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Mrs. Patricia G. Pereira for her assistance in the analysis of quantitative coronary angiography.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro A. Lemos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lemos, P., Ribeiro, E., Perin, M. et al. Angiographic Segment Size in Patients Referred for Coronary Intervention is Influenced by Constitutional, Anatomical, and Clinical Features. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 23, 1–7 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-006-9119-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-006-9119-2

Keywords

Navigation