Skip to main content
. 2023 Oct 20;39(1):34–44. doi: 10.1007/s12928-023-00965-4

Table 4.

Follow-up FD-OCT analysis of acute malapposed struts

Parameters Total (n = 30) BP-EES (n = 15) DP-EES (n = 15) P-value
Follow-up duration, days 351 (284–407) 357 (329–396) 349 (267–417) 0.917
Revascularization 1 (3.3) 0 (0) 1 (6.7) 1.000
Analyzable struts 361 (90.0) 222 (91.4) 139 (88.0)
Struts without analyzable FD-OCT images 31 (7.7) 21 (8.6) 10 (6.3)
Struts in restenosed cross-section 9 (2.2) 0 (0) 9 (5.7)
Resolved ASM / analyzable struts 308 (85.3) 204 (91.9) 104 (74.8)  < 0.001
 Residual S–V distance of struts without resolution of ASM, µm 311 (149–420) 295 (205–450) 330 (185–397) 0.425
Neointimal coverage/ analyzable struts 311 (86.2) 205 (92.3) 106 (76.3)  < 0.001
 Neointimal thickness, µm 64 (36–132) 58 (32–130) 75 (44–150) 0.028
Adequate vascular healing/analyzable struts 301 (83.4) 199 (89.6) 102 (73.4)  < 0.001
 Tissue growth, µm 364 (277–490) 393 (291–517) 330 (242–468) 0.003

Data presented as n (%), interquartile range (25%–75%)

ASM  acute stent malposition, S–V distance stent–vessel lumen distance