Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 593

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Morphological Predictors of Restenosis After Coronary Stenting in Humans

Open access
Farb, Andrew, Weber, Deena K., Kolodgie, Frank D., Burke, Allen P., Virmani, Renu·2002·Circulation

Abstract

Background — Experimental studies suggest that arterial injury and inflammation lead to increased neointimal growth after stenting. Despite the increased use of coronary stents in humans, there are only limited pathological data on the morphological features of in-stent restenosis. Methods and Results — Detailed histology was performed on 116 stents, implanted ≥90 days in 87 coronary arteries, from 56 patients (mean age, 59±13 years). The mean duration of stent implant was 10 months. In-stent restenosis was defined as a stent area stenosis of >75%. Lumen area increased as stent area increased ( r 2 =0.27, P =0.0001), but there was a much stronger correlation between stent area and neointimal area ( r 2 =0.70, P <0.0001). Arterial medial fracture was associated with a 29% increase ( P <0.01) in neointimal thickness compared with arteries with an intact media. Neointimal thickness ( P =0.0001), inflammatory cell density ( P <0.0001), and neointimal vascular channel density ( P <0.0001) were greater when struts were in contact with a ruptured arterial media compared with fibrous plaque or an intact fibrous cap. Stent strut penetration into a lipid core was associated with increased neointimal thickness ( P =0.04) and inflammatory cell density ( P =0.03). Neointimal inflammatory cell content was 2.4-fold greater in stents with restenosis versus no restenosis, and inflammation was associated with increased neoangiogenesis. Conclusions — Coronary stenting that is accompanied by medial damage or penetration of the stent into a lipid core induces increased arterial inflammation, which is associated with increased neointimal growth. These data suggest the use of stenting strategies that reduce inflammation and neoangiogenesis to reduce the incidence of restenosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.0000019071.72887.bd

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 593

Metadata

Authors
Farb, A., Weber, D. K., Kolodgie, F. D., Burke, A. P., & Virmani, R.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2002-06-25
Volume
105
Issue
25
Pages
2974-2980
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2112961536
Cited by
593
References
0
FWCI
33.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Morphological Predictors of Restenosis After Coronary Stenting in Humans. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000019071.72887.bd
The paper
Farb, A., Weber, D. K., Kolodgie, F. D., Burke, A. P., & Virmani, R. (2002). Morphological Predictors of Restenosis After Coronary Stenting in Humans. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000019071.72887.bd

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.