Table III.
Comparison of success rates of chronic occlusive in-stent restenosis in previous studies.
| Author | Year | Prevalence of ISR CTO |
Success rate | Wire/Catheter Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yang et al.(15) | 2004 | Not reported | 5/5 (100%) | Front runner catheter |
| Abbas et al.(3) | 2005 | 25% | 49/78 (63%) | Not described |
| Werner et al.(4) | 2009 | 5-10% | 70% | Not described |
| Adbel-karim et al(5) |
2010 | Not reported | 15/21 (71%) | Whisper, Confianza Pro 12, Cross it 100, Pilot 200, Runthrough, Stingray guidewire |
| Brilakis et al.(16) | 2010 | Not reported | 2/2 (100%) | Venture catheter / Stingray guidewire |
| Papayannis et al.(14) |
2011 | Not reported | 6/6 (100%) | CrossBoss catheter |
| Subinas et al.(17) | 2013 | Not reported | 133/156 (85.2%) |
Not described |
| Wilson et al.(9) | 2013 | 14.9% | 27/31 (87%) | CrossBoss catheter |