Purpose: The use of endovascular coronary brachytherapy to prevent restenosis following percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) began in April 1997 at the Department of Interventional Cardiology of the Thoraxcenter at the University Hospital of Rotterdam. This article reviews the more than 250 patients that have been treated so far. Methods and Materials: The Beta-Cath™ System (Novoste), a manual, hydraulic afterloader with 12 90Sr seeds, was used in the Beta Energy Restenosis Trial (BERT-1.5, n=31), for compassionate use (n=25), in the Beta-Cath System trial (n=27) and in the Beta Radiation in Europe (BRIE, n=14). Since the Beta-Cath™ System has been commercialized in Europe, 57 patients have been treated and registered in RENO (Registry Novoste). In the Proliferation Reduction with Vascular Energy Trial (PREVENT), 37 patients were randomized using the Guidant-Nucletron remote control afterloader with a 32P source wire and a centering catheter. Radioactive 32P coated stents have been implanted in 102 patients. In the Isostent Restenosis Intervention Study 1 (IRIS 1), 26 patients received a stent with an activity of 0.75-1.5 μCi, and in the IRIS 2 (European 32P dose response trial), 40 patients were treated with an activity of 6-12 μCi. In two consecutive pilot trials, radioactive stents with non-radioactive ends (cold-end stents) and with ends containing higher levels of activity (hot-end stents) were implanted in 21 and 17 patients, respectively. Results: In the BERT-1.5 trial, the radiation dose, prescribed at 2 mm from the source train (non-centered), was 12 Gy (10 patients), 14 Gy (10 patients) and 16 Gy (11 patients). At 6-month follow-up, 8 out of 28 (29%) patients developed restenosis. The target lesion revascularization rate (TLR) was 7 out of 30 (23%) at 6 months and 8 out of 30 (27%) at 1 year. Two patients presented with late thrombosis in the first year. For compassionate use patients, a restenosis rate (RR) of 53% was observed. In the PREVENT trial, 34 of 37 patients underwent an angiographic 6-month follow-up. The doses prescribed at 0.5 mm depth into the vessel wall were 0 Gy (8), 28 Gy (9), 35 Gy (11) and 42 Gy (8). TLR was 14% in the irradiated patients and 25% in the placebo group. One patient developed late thrombosis. In the IRIS 1 trial, 23 patients showed an RR of 17% (in-stent). In the IRIS 2 trial, in-stent restenosis was not seen in 36 patients at 6-month follow-up. However, a high RR (44%) was observed at the stent edges. Conclusions: The integration of vascular brachytherapy in the catheterization laboratory is feasible and the different treatment techniques that are used are safe. Problems, such as edge restenosis and late thrombotic occlusion, have been identified as limiting factors of this technique. Solutions have been suggested and will be tested in future trials. Copyright

Additional Metadata
Keywords Coronary vessel, Intravascular brachytherapy, Radiation, Restenosis
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1522-1865(00)00045-7, hdl.handle.net/1765/65142
Journal Cardiovascular Radiation Medicine
Citation
Coen, V.L.M.A, Serruys, P.W.J.C, Levendag, P.C, Knook, A.H.M, Wardeh, A.J, van der Giessen, W.J, … den Boer, A. (2001). Endovascular brachytherapy in coronary arteries: The Rotterdam experience. Cardiovascular Radiation Medicine, 2(1), 42–50. doi:10.1016/S1522-1865(00)00045-7