Search

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors have been applied to vascular coronary devices to avoid neointimal growth and have become the predominant pharmacological agents used to prevent restenosis. mTOR inhibitors can affect not only proliferating vascular smooth muscle cells but also endothelial cells and therefore can result in delayed healing of the vessel including endothelialization. Emerging evidence suggests accelerated atherosclerosis due to the downstream negative effects on endothelial barrier functional recovery. The development of neoatherosclerosis within the neointima of drug-eluting stents can result in late thrombotic events. This type of problematic healing response may open the way for specific mTOR kinase inhibitors, such as ATP-competitive mTOR inhibitors. These inhibitors demonstrate a better healing profile than traditional limus-based drug-eluting stent and their clinical efficacy remains unknown.

The presence of macrophages within the plaque is a defining hallmark of atherosclerosis. Macrophages are exposed to various microenvironments such as oxidized lipids and cytokines which effect their phenotypic differentiation and activation. Classically, macrophages have been divided into two groups: M1 and M2 macrophages induced by T-helper 1 and T-helper 2 cytokines, respectively. However, for a decade, greater phenotypic heterogeneity and plasticity of these cells have since been reported in various models. In addition to M1 and M2 macrophage phenotypes, the concept of additional macrophage phenotypes such as M (Hb), Mox, and M4 has emerged. Understanding the mechanisms and functions of distinct phenotype of macrophages can lead to determination of their potential role in atherosclerotic plaque pathogenesis. However, there are still many unresolved controversies regarding their phenotype and function with respect to atherosclerosis. Here, we summarize and focus on the differential subtypes of macrophages in atherosclerotic plaques and their differing functional roles based upon microenvironments such as lipid, intraplaque hemorrhage, and plaque regression.

Introduction : Coronary bifurcation lesions are involved in up to 20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However, bifurcation lesion intervention is associated with a high complication rate, and optimal treatment of coronary bifurcation is an ongoing debate. Areas covered : Both different stenting techniques and a variety of devices have been suggested for bifurcation treatment, including the use of conventional coronary stents, bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS), drug-eluting balloons (DEB), and stents dedicated to bifurcations. This review will summarize different therapeutic approaches with their advantages and shortcomings, with special emphasis on histopathologic and physiologic effects of each treatment strategy. Expert opinion : Histopathology and clinical data have shown that a more simple treatment strategy is beneficial in bifurcation lesions, achieving superior results. Bifurcation interventions through balloon angioplasty or placement of stents can importantly alter the bifurcation's geometry and accordingly modify local flow conditions. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) studies have shown that the outcome of bifurcation interventions is governed by local hemodynamic shear conditions. Minimizing detrimental flow conditions as much as possible should be the ultimate strategy to achieve long-term success of bifurcation interventions.