Platelet Distribution Width on Admission Predicts In-Stent Restenosis in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

• Main Authors: Cheng-Ping Hu, Yu Du, Yong Zhu, Chao Shi, Zheng Qin, Ying-Xin Zhao
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer 2018-01-01
• Series: Chinese Medical Journal
• Subjects: Blood Platelet; Coronary Restenosis; Mean Platelet Volume; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
• Online Access: http://www.cmj.org/article.asp?issn=0366-6999;year=2018;volume=131;issue=7;spage=757;epage=763;aulast=Hu

Background: It is known that there is a definite association between platelet distribution width (PDW) and poor prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, there are no data available regarding the prognostic significance of PDW for in-stent restenosis (ISR) in patients with CAD and T2DM. We aimed to determine the value of PDW on admission that predicted ISR in patients with CAD and T2DM. Methods: Between January 2012 and December 2013, a total of 5232 consecutive patients diagnosed with CAD and T2DM undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were admitted. Three years of retrospective follow-up was undertaken. A total of 438 patients with second angiography operations were included. ISR was defined as ≥50% luminal stenosis of the stent or peri-stent segments. Continuous data were presented as the mean ± standard deviation or median (P25, P75) and were compared by one-way analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis H-test. Categorical variables were presented as percentages and were compared by Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. The association between PDW and ISR was calculated by logistic regression analysis. A two-sided value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed by SPSS version 22.0 for windows. Results: Fifty-nine patients with ISR, accounting for 13.5% of the total, were included. ISR was significantly more frequent in patients with higher PDW quartiles compared with lower quartiles. We observed that PDW had a strong relationship with mean platelet volume (r = 0.647, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.535–0.750, P <0.0001). The receiver-operating characteristic curves showed that the PDW cutoff value for predicting ISR rate was 13.65 fl with sensitivity of 59.3% and specificity of 72.4% (area under curve [AUC] = 0.701, 95% CI: 0.625–0.777, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the risk of ISR increased approximately 30% when PDW increased one unit (odds ratio [OR]: 1.289, 95% CI: 1.110–1.498, P = 0.001). Patients with higher PDW, defined as more than 13.65 fl, had a 4-fold higher risk of ISR compared with lower PDW (OR: 4.241, 95% CI: 1.879–9.572, P = 0.001). Furthermore, when patients were divided by PDW quartiles values, PDW was able to predict ISR (Q2: OR = 0.762, 95% CI: 0.189–3.062, P = 0.762; Q3: OR = 2.782, 95% CI: 0.865–8.954, P = 0.086; and Q4: OR = 3.849, 95% CI: 1.225–12.097, P = 0.021, respectively; P for trend <0.0001). Conclusion: PDW is an independent predictor of ISR in patients with CAD and T2DM.