Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Routine Angiographic Follow-Up After Coronary Artery Disease Revascularization: Is Seeing Believing?

  • Ischemic Heart Disease (D Mukherjee, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of the Review

Coronary artery disease is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in the world, and PCI and CABG account for over a million procedures performed annually in the USA. The goal of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is to achieve complete revascularization (CR) if at all possible. However, restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST) remain the Achilles heel of contemporary PCI with restenosis rates between 10 and 30% with bare metal stents to 5–15% after drug-eluting stents and ST rates of around 0.8 vs 1.2%, respectively. Routine angiography after revascularization seems theoretically attractive as this may allow intervention before clinical events occur. In this manuscript, we review the literature regarding routine angiography after PCI or CABG and its outcomes.

Recent Findings

According to the 2016 update from the American Heart Association (AHA), 15.5 million people above the age of 20 have coronary heart disease (CHD) in the USA. The prevalence of CHD is now almost similar in both men and women, and one American suffers from a myocardial infarction (MI) every 42 s. Recent data from randomized clinical trials and observational studies does not support the use of routine coronary angiography after revascularization in asymptomatic patients. There are some studies which show that routine angiography may have a role in left main or complex coronary interventions; however, these findings are exploratory and were not seen in randomized trials.

Summary

After reviewing the data on routine angiography after coronary revascularization, we came to the conclusion that current data does not support the use of routine angiography for asymptomatic patients. However, there is a lack of randomized controlled trial in this field with only one recent trial reporting negative outcomes.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Sanchis-Gomar F, Perez-Quilis C, Leischik R, Lucia A. Epidemiology of coronary heart disease and acute coronary syndrome. Ann Transl Med. 2016;4(13):256. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.06.33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Eisen A, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E. Updates on acute coronary syndrome: a review. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1(6):718–30. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2016.2049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Garg S, Serruys PW. An update on drug-eluting stents. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2013;15(1):61–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-012-0219-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kirtane AJ, Gupta A, Iyengar S, Moses JW, Leon MB, Applegate R, et al. Safety and efficacy of drug-eluting and bare metal stents: comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies. Circulation. 2009;119(25):3198–206. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.826479.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonaa KH, Mannsverk J, Wiseth R, et al. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(13):1242–52. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1607991.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cutlip DE, Chauhan MS, Baim DS, Ho KKL, Popma JJ, Carrozza JP, et al. Clinical restenosis after coronary stenting: perspectives from multicenter clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40(12):2082–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02597-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lansky AJ, Brar SS, Yaqub M, Sood P, Applegate RJ, Lazar D, et al. Impact of routine angiographic follow-up after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents in the SPIRIT III randomized trial at three years. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110(1):21–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.02.040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ruygrok PN, Melkert R, Morel MA, et al. Does angiography six months after coronary intervention influence management and outcome? Benestent II investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;34(5):1507–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00380-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. ten Berg JM, Kelder JC, Suttorp MJ, Verheugt FW, Thijs Plokker HW. Influence of planned six-month follow-up angiography on late outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38(4):1061–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01476-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Diagnostic Catheterization Writing G, Patel MR, Bailey SR, et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 appropriate use criteria for diagnostic catheterization: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144:39–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rupprecht HJ, Espinola-Klein C, Erbel R, Nafe B, Brennecke R, Dietz U, et al. Impact of routine angiographic follow-up after angioplasty. Am Heart J. 1998;136(4):613–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8703(98)70007-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schuhlen H, Kastrati A, Mehilli J, et al. Restenosis detected by routine angiographic follow-up and late mortality after coronary stent placement. Am Heart J. 2004;147(2):317–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2003.10.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cassese S, Byrne RA, Schulz S, Hoppman P, Kreutzer J, Feuchtenberger A, et al. Prognostic role of restenosis in 10 004 patients undergoing routine control angiography after coronary stenting. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(2):94–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu383.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mindrescu C, Brener SJ, Guerchicoff A, et al. Impact of scheduled angiographic follow-up in patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Interv Cardiol. 2013;26(4):319–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/joic.12038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. • Pinto DS, Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, Hermiller J, O’Shaughnessy C, et al. Impact of routine angiographic follow-up on the clinical benefits of paclitaxel-eluting stents: results from the TAXUS-IV trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(1):32–6. This was multicenter RCT which looked at rouitne angiography after DES or BMS. They found that a higher rate of MI occurred in clinical follow up group (2.3% vs. 4.7% p = 0.023), with no difference in mortality (1.1% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.89). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.02.060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Uchida T, Popma J, Stone GW, Ellis SG, Turco MA, Ormiston JA, et al. The clinical impact of routine angiographic follow-up in randomized trials of drug-eluting stents: a critical assessment of “oculostenotic” reintervention in patients with intermediate lesions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(4):403–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.01.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. • Mencel G, Kowalczyk J, Lenarczyk R, Chodór P, Wąs T, Świerad M, et al. The impact of routine angiographic follow-up in a population of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention within the left main coronary artery. Angiology. 2016;67(8):742–8. This was an observational study looking at routine angiography after left main PCI. Authors concluded that lack of angiographic follow-up after PCI of the LMCA may result in higher long-term mortality. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003319715613691.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. •• Shiomi H, Morimoto T, Kitaguchi S, Nakagawa Y, Ishii K, Haruna Y, et al. The ReACT trial: randomized evaluation of routine follow-up coronary angiography after percutaneous coronary intervention trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10(2):109–17. In this RCT 700 patines were randomized to routine angiogrpahy vs clinical fopllowup after PCI. No clinical benefits were observed for routine angiography after PCI and early coronary revascularization rates were increased within routine angiography strategy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2016.10.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim YH, Her AY, Rha SW, Choi BG, Shim M, Choi SY, et al. Routine angiographic follow-up versus clinical follow-up after percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction. Yonsei Med J. 2017;58(4):720–30. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2017.58.4.720.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Misumida N, Kobayashi A, Kim SM, Abdel-Latif A, Ziada KM. Role of routine follow-up coronary angiography after percutaneous coronary intervention—systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ J. 2017.

  21. Breeman A, Serruys PW. Indications for routine heart-catheterization after CABG and PTCA. Int J Card Imaging. 1993;9(Suppl 1):71–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01143148.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rupprecht HJ, Hamm C, Ischinger T, Dietz U, Reimers J, Meyer J. Angiographic follow-up results of a randomized study on angioplasty versus bypass surgery (GABI trial). GABI Study Group. Eur Heart J. 1996;17(8):1192–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a015036.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Alderman EL, Corley SD, Fisher LD, Chaitman BR, Faxon DP, Foster ED, et al. Five-year angiographic follow-up of factors associated with progression of coronary artery disease in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS). CASS Participating Investigators and Staff. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4):1141–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(93)90429-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Arima M, Kanoh T, Suzuki T, Kuremoto K, Tanimoto K, Oigawa T, et al. Serial angiographic follow-up beyond 10 years after coronary artery bypass grafting. Circ J. 2005;69(8):896–902. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.69.896.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ellis S, Alderman EL, Cain K, Wright A, Bourassa M, Fisher L. Morphology of left anterior descending coronary territory lesions as a predictor of anterior myocardial infarction: a CASS Registry Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989;13(7):1481–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(89)90336-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ndrepepa G, Iijima R, Kufner S, Braun S, Cassese S, Byrne RA, et al. Association of progression or regression of coronary artery atherosclerosis with long-term prognosis. Am Heart J. 2016;177:9–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2016.03.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Scanlon PJ, Faxon DP, Audet AM, Carabello B, Dehmer GJ, Eagle KA, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for coronary angiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on Coronary Angiography). Developed in collaboration with the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33(6):1756–824.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Latib A, Mussardo M, Ielasi A, Tarsia G, Godino C, al-Lamee R, et al. Long-term outcomes after the percutaneous treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4(2):155–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.09.027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(21):2105–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.087.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mancini GB, Hartigan PM, Shaw LJ, et al. Predicting outcome in the COURAGE trial (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation): coronary anatomy versus ischemia. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7(2):195–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2013.10.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith SC Jr, et al. 2009 focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update) a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(23):2205–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.10.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Interventional Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center, Tufts School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA

    Harsh Agrawal, Saba Lahsaei & Joseph P. Carrozza Jr

  2. Interventional Cardiology Fellow, St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center, Tufts School of Medicine, 736 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA, 02135, USA

    Harsh Agrawal

  3. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Texas Tech University, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, El Paso, TX, USA

    Mohamed Teleb, Luis Carbajal & Ruben Montanez

Authors
  1. Harsh Agrawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed Teleb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saba Lahsaei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luis Carbajal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ruben Montanez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joseph P. Carrozza Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harsh Agrawal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Harsh Agrawal, Mohamed Teleb, Saba Lahsaei, Luis Carbajal, and Ruben Montanez declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Joseph P. Carrozza, Jr. reports grants from RenalGuard.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Ischemic Heart Disease

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agrawal, H., Teleb, M., Lahsaei, S. et al. Routine Angiographic Follow-Up After Coronary Artery Disease Revascularization: Is Seeing Believing?. Curr Cardiol Rep 20, 17 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-018-0957-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-018-0957-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation