What is the other classification used for In-Stent Restenosis (ISR)?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 7, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Classification Systems for In-Stent Restenosis

The Mehran classification is the other primary classification system used for in-stent restenosis (ISR), which categorizes lesions into four patterns (I-IV) based on lesion length and geographic distribution relative to the stent, with direct prognostic implications for target lesion revascularization rates. 1, 2, 3

Mehran Classification System

The Mehran classification divides ISR into four distinct angiographic patterns based on the length and location of neointimal hyperplasia 1, 3:

  • Pattern I (Focal): Lesions ≤10 mm in length within the stent, associated with the best prognosis and 19% target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate 1, 2, 3

  • Pattern II (Intrastent Diffuse): ISR >10 mm confined within the stent boundaries, with 35% TLR rate 1, 2, 3

  • Pattern III (Proliferative): ISR >10 mm extending beyond the stent edges (either proximal or distal), with 50% TLR rate 1, 2, 3

  • Pattern IV (Total Occlusion): Complete occlusion of the previously stented segment, carrying the worst prognosis with 83% TLR rate 1, 2, 3

Clinical Significance and Prognostic Value

The Mehran classification provides critical prognostic information that directly guides treatment decisions 2, 3:

  • Progressive worsening: TLR rates increase systematically from Pattern I through Pattern IV (19% → 35% → 50% → 83%), demonstrating the classification's strong predictive validity 1, 2, 3

  • Independent predictor: ISR pattern class is an independent predictor of TLR (odds ratio 1.7), along with diabetes (odds ratio 2.8) and previously recurrent ISR (odds ratio 2.7) 3

  • Treatment stratification: Patterns I and II are typically managed with balloon angioplasty and repeat stenting, while Patterns III and IV often require atheroablation devices or consideration of coronary artery bypass grafting 1, 2, 3

Validation and Accuracy

The Mehran classification has been validated through multiple imaging modalities 3:

  • Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) confirms the angiographic accuracy of pattern assignment 3

  • The classification demonstrates high inter-rater reliability and reproducibility in clinical practice 3

  • Pattern distribution in clinical series shows Pattern I in 42% of cases, Pattern II in 21%, Pattern III in 30%, and Pattern IV in 7% 3

Application Beyond Coronary Arteries

A similar classification system has been adapted for carotid artery stenting, with five patterns (I-V) that include an additional category for end-stent lesions, demonstrating the classification's broader applicability 4:

  • Type IV lesions (diffuse proliferative extending outside the stent) in carotid ISR show 58.8% TLR rates, comparable to coronary Pattern III-IV lesions 4

  • The carotid adaptation maintains the same prognostic principles, with diffuse proliferative patterns predicting worse outcomes (odds ratio 5.1 for TLR) 4

Critical Clinical Pitfalls

The most common error is treating all ISR patterns identically without considering the Mehran classification, which leads to suboptimal treatment selection and higher recurrence rates. 2, 3 Pattern IV ISR warrants consideration of surgical revascularization rather than repeat PCI given the 83% TLR rate, while Pattern I lesions can be successfully managed with drug-eluting stents alone 2, 3.

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Guideline

In-Stent Restenosis Management

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.