Long-Term Results of Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis: The RIBS VI Study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) provide similar results to drug-coated balloons (DCBs) but are inferior to drug-eluting stents (DES) at 1 year. However, the long-term efficacy of BVS in these patients remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of BVS in patients with ISR. METHODS: RIBS VI (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment; NCT02672878) and RIBS VI Scoring (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment With Scoring Balloon; NTC03069066) are prospective multicenter studies designed to evaluate the results of BVS in patients with ISR (N = 220). The inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical to those used in the RIBS IV (ISR of DES) (Restenosis Intra-stent of Drug-eluting Stents: Drug-eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-eluting Stent; NCT01239940) and RIBS V (ISR of bare-metal stents) (Restenosis Intra-stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-eluting Stent; NCT01239953) randomized trials (including 249 ISR patients treated with DCBs and 249 ISR patients treated with DES). A prespecified comparison of the long-term results obtained with these treatment modalities (ie, DES, DCBs, and BVS) was performed. RESULTS: Clinical follow-up at 3 years was obtained in all (100%) 718 patients. The 3-year target lesion revascularization rate after BVS was 14.1% (vs 12.9% after DCBs [not significant], and 5.2% after DES [HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.47-5.36; P = 0.001]). In a landmark analysis (>1 year), the target lesion revascularization rate after BVS was higher than after DES (adjusted HR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.15-10.08) and DCBs (adjusted HR: 3.33; 95% CI: 1.14-9.70). Very late vessel thrombosis was also more frequent with BVS (BVS: 1.8%, DCBs: 0.4%, DES: 0%; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ISR, late clinical results of DES are superior to those obtained with DCBs and BVS. Beyond the first year, DCBs are safer and more effective than BVS.

Performance of drug-coated balloons in coronary and below-the-knee arteries: Anatomical, physiological and pathological considerations.

Below-the-knee (infrapopliteal) atherosclerotic disease, which presents as chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) in nearly 50% of patients, represents a treatment challenge when it comes to the endovascular intervention arm of management. Due to reduced tissue perfusion, patients usually experience pain at rest and atrophic changes correlated to the extent of the compromised perfusion. Unfortunately, the prognosis remains unsatisfactory with 30% of patients requiring major amputation and a mortality rate of 25% within 1 year. To date, randomized multicentre trials of endovascular intervention have shown that drug-eluting stents (DES) increase patency rate and lower target lesion revascularization rate compared to plain balloon angioplasty and bare-metal stents. The majority of these trials recruited patients with focal infrapopliteal lesions, while most patients requiring endovascular intervention have complex and diffuse atherosclerotic disease. Moreover, due to the nature of the infrapopliteal arteries, the use of long DES is limited. Following recent results of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in the treatment of femoropopliteal and coronary arteries, it was hoped that similar effective results would be achieved in the infrapopliteal arteries. In reality, multicentre trials have failed to support the proposed hypothesis and no advantage was found in using DCBs in comparison to plain balloon angioplasty. This review aims to explore anatomical, physiological and pathological differences between lesions of the infrapopliteal and coronary arteries to explain the differences in outcome when using DCBs.

Stand-Alone Rotational Atherectomy Versus Combination With Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for the Endovascular Treatment of Heavily-Calcified Femoropopliteal and Popliteal Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Despite major technical advances in the endovascular treatment for peripheral artery disease (PAD), heavy calcification still represents a major obstacle to overcome both due to the high number of periprocedural complications (dissections, embolization, etc) and the limited long-term durability. A promising tool to overcome these obstacles is debulking calcified lesions with atherectomy. Since vessel preparation with atherectomy might even improve the diffusion of antiproliferative substances, we wanted to evaluate the impact of atherectomy±DCB in lower extremity PAD. OBJECTIVES: To explore the safety, efficacy, and long-term durability on treatment of rotational atherectomy in heavily-calcified complex femoropopliteal and isolated popliteal lesions. In addition, we wanted to investigate whether advanced debulking strategies where atherectomy is followed by a drug-coated angioplasty bear an additional advantage over atherectomy and standard percutaneous angioplasty alone in terms of clinical success and freedom from target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: In total, 218 femoropopliteal and 46 popliteal predominantly heavily-calcified lesions have been investigated. Of 264 cases, in a total of 53 cases, atherectomy treatment was followed by a drug-eluting balloon (DEB) angioplasty (43 in the femoropopliteal and 10 in the popliteal lesions). The lesions were characterized by a significant length (17.3±12.1 cm) and complexity (TASC C in 48.4% and TASC D in 19.7%). During a mean follow-up of 19 (±11) months, a total of 12 patients (4.5%) died. Clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) was performed in 32 (14.7%) femoropopliteal and 11 isolated popliteal (23.9%) lesions and did not differ significantly between stand-alone atherectomy and atherectomy followed by a DEB. Mean ABI was improved from 0.57±0.22 immediately before intervention to 0.86±0.23 on intervention and remained stable: 0.83±0.16 at follow-up. During follow-up, a mean Rutherford category was reduced from 3.64±1.0 to 2.38±0.98. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-life study provides evidence that atherectomy in combination with DEB is safe and effective but did not have a significant impact on the freedom from target lesion revascularization in our population. Additional large-scale randomized trials are needed to verify these findings. CLINICAL IMPACT: This study investigates the efficacy and safety of combining rotational atherectomy with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for treating heavily calcified femoropopliteal and isolated popliteal lesions in peripheral artery disease (PAD). The retrospective analysis of 264 patients highlights the potential of this combination in improving procedural success and reducing periinterventional complications. While demonstrating an excellent procedural and clinical success rate over an average 19-month follow-up, the study finds no significant long-term benefit in freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared to atherectomy alone. These findings suggest the need for further research to optimize treatment strategies for complex PAD cases, particularly in evaluating the long-term clinical benefits of such combined interventions.

Long-term outcomes following drug-eluting balloon or thin-strut drug-eluting stents for treatment of in-stent restenosis stratified by duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DEB-Dragon Registry).

Introduction: Data regarding the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis (DES-ISR) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and drug-eluting balloons (DEB) or DES are not unambiguous. Aim: To evaluate the relationship between long-term outcomes and the length of DAPT in patients treated with PCI due to DES-ISR with DEB or DES. Material and methods: Overall, a total of 1,367 consecutive patients with DES-ISR, who underwent PCI with DEB or DES between 2008 and 2019 entered the study. The mean length of the follow-up was 1,298.7 ±794 days. We assessed study endpoints according to the duration of DAPT (≤ 3 vs. > 3 and ≤ 6 vs. > 6 months) before and after propensity score matching (PSM): stroke, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI), death and device oriented composite endpoints (DOCE). Kaplan-Meier estimates were created to differentiate long-term outcomes. Results: Pairwise contrast analysis considering type of PCI (DES vs. DEB) and duration of DAPT (≤ 6 vs. > 6 months) before PSM revealed superiority of DES + DAPT > 6 months vs. DEB + DAPT > 6 months for DOCE (p < 0.001), TVR (p = 0.02) and TLR (p = 0.01). Also, DES + DAPT ≤ 6 months was found to be superior compared to DEB + DAPT ≤ 6 months for DOCE (p < 0.001), TVR (p = 0.02) and TLR (p = 0.01). Kaplan-Meier estimate analysis confirmed that DAPT > 6 months is related to a higher stroke rate (p = 0.01) when compared to ≤ 6 months. Conclusions: Treatment with DAPT in patients with DES-ISR is related to better long-term outcomes in the case of PCI with DES than DEB. DAPT > 6 months is related to the greater rate of strokes, independently of the type of treatment (DES and DEB) than DAPT ≤ 6 months.

Outcomes With Drug-Coated Balloons vs. Drug-Eluting Stents in Small-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: The use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in small-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) remains controversial. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the outcomes of DCB vs. DES in de-novo SVD. We included a total of 5 RCTs (1459 patients), with (DCB n = 734 and DES n = 725). RESULTS: Over a median follow-up duration of 6 months, DCB was associated with smaller late lumen loss (LLL) compared with DES (mean difference -0.12 mm) (95% confidence intervals (CI) [-0.21, -0.03 mm], p = 0.01). Over a median follow-up of 12 months, both modalities had similar risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (8.7% vs. 10.2%; odds ratio (OR): 0.94, 95% CI [0.49-1.79], p = 084), all-cause mortality (1.17% vs. 2.38%; OR: 0.53, 95% CI [0.16-1.75], p = 0.30), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (7.9% vs. 3.9%; OR: 1.26, 95% CI [0.51-3.14], p = 0.62), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (8.2% vs. 7.8%; OR: 1.06, 95% CI [0.40-2.82], p = 0.91). DCBs were associated with lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) compared with DES (1.55% vs. 3.31%; OR: 0.48, 95% CI [0.23-1.00], p = 0.05, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: PCI of SVD with DCBs is associated with smaller LLL, lower risk of MI, and similar risk of MACE, death, TLR, and TVR compared with DES over one year. DCB appears as an attractive alternative to DES in patients with de-novo SVD, but long-term clinical data are still needed.

Mortality Rates After Paclitaxel-Coated Device Use in Patients With Occlusive Femoropopliteal Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: A late increased mortality risk has been reported in a summary level meta-analysis of patients with femoropopliteal artery occlusive disease treated with paclitaxel-coated angioplasty balloons and stents. However, at the longer follow up timepoints that analysis was limited by small trial numbers and few participants. The aim of this study was to report an updated summary level risk of all-cause mortality after treatment with paclitaxel-coated devices in that same patient group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to investigate the mortality outcomes associated with paclitaxel-coated devices used to treat patients with occlusive disease of femoropopliteal arteries (last search date December 10, 2020). The single primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We identified 34 randomized controlled trials (7654 patients; 84% intermittent claudication). There were 622 deaths among 4147 (15.0%) subjects in the paclitaxel device group and 475 deaths among 3507 (13.5%) subjects in the noncoated control group [relative risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.20, p=0.20, I2=0%). All-cause mortality was similar between groups at 12 months (34 studies, 7654 patients; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22, p=0.94, I2=0%), 24 months (20 studies, 3799 patients; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.55, p=0.31, I2=0%), and 60 months (9 studies, 2288 patients; RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.45, p=0.08, I2=0%). CONCLUSION: This updated meta-analysis with included additional trials and larger patient numbers shows no evidence of increased risk of all-cause mortality in patients treated with paclitaxel-coated devices, compared with uncoated devices for femoropopliteal disease at all time points to 60 months. There is therefore no justification to limit their use, or alter regulatory body follow-up recommendations in this patient population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42020216140.

Long term outcome after treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions using three different drug coated balloons.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term efficacy of three currently available drug coated balloons (DCB) for the treatment of de-novo coronary lesions. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry. Between 2009 and 2017, three currently available DCB brands used in the treatment of de novo lesions were included. Outcomes were clinically driven restenosis and target lesion thrombosis (TLT) (per device) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization (per patient) at 4 years. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to adjust for differences. RESULTS: We included 6715 lesions treated with DCBs, 4483 SeQuent® Please (S-DCB), 1071 IN.PACT Falcon (I-DCB) and 1161 Pantera® Lux (P-DCB), in 5670 patients. The mean DCB diameter was 2.4 mm. Bailout stenting occurred in 6.7% of lesions. Angiographic success was 98.5%. The overall cumulative rate of restenosis was 5.5% (299 events). The risk for reported restenosis did not significantly differ between I-DCB vs S-DCB, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.34, P-DCB vs S-DCB aHR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63-1.23 and I-DCB vs P-DCB aHR 1.10; 95% CI 0.72-1.68. The cumulative risk for TLT was 0.8% in all three DCBs. The risk for MACE or individual components of MACE did not differ between the three patient-groups. CONCLUSION: In de novo coronary lesions, we found comparable long-term efficacy with three currently available DCB brands. DCB angioplasty was feasible with low risk for long-term restenosis and TLT.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes with drug-coated balloons vs. stenting in acute myocardial infarction.

The role of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of all published studies comparing the outcomes of DCBs vs. stenting in AMI patients. Four studies with 497 patients (534 lesions) were included (three randomized controlled trials and one observational study). During a mean follow-up of 9 months (range 6-12 months), DCBs were associated with similar risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (5% vs. 4.4%; OR 1.24, 95% CI: [0.34, 4.51], p = 0.74, I2 = 35%), all-cause mortality (0.02% vs. 0.04%; OR 077, 95% CI: [0.15, 3.91], p = 0.75, I2 = 25%), cardiac death (0.01% vs. 0.02%; OR 0.64, 95% CI: [0.16, 2.64], p = 0.54), myocardial infarction (0% vs. 1.4%; OR 0.18, 95% CI: [0.01, 3.56], p = 0.26), and target lesion revascularization (3.7% vs. 2%; OR 1.74, 95% CI: [0.42, 7.13], p = 0.44, I2 = 17%) compared with stenting. During a mean follow-up of 7 months (range 6-9 months), DCBs had similar late lumen loss compared with stenting (mean difference 0.04 mm, 95% CI [- 0.21-0.28], p = 0.77, I2 = 92%). In patients with AMI, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of clinical and angiographic outcomes between AMI patients treated with DCB and DES. Larger studies with longer-term follow-up are needed to assess the clinical utility of DCBs in this setting.

Cardiovascular outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting balloons in chronic kidney disease: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poorer outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents. Drug-eluting balloons are used for in-stent restenosis and selected cases of de-novo coronary lesions. Little is known regarding the outcomes of individuals with CKD who undergo PCI with drug-eluting balloons. The goal of this study was to assess outcomes of PCI with drug-eluting balloons in individuals with CKD. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis, outcomes of PCI with drug-eluting balloons were compared between 101 patients with CKD and 261 without CKD. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml/min/1.73m2. We compared demographics, procedure data and clinical outcomes in the first and second years following the procedure. RESULTS: Rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and myocardial infarction were higher in patients with than without CKD: 23.8% vs. 13.8%, P < 0.005 and 15.9% vs. 3.8%, P < 0.001, respectively. Rates of target lesion revascularization were similar, 14.9 and 11.5%, respectively, P = 0.4. Shorter duration of dual anti-platelet therapy was observed among patients with than without CKD (10.0 + 3.4 vs. 10.9 + 3.7 months, P < 0.05). First-year hemorrhage episodes were similar in the two groups (0.08 ± 0.4 and 0.03 ± 0.2, respectively, P = 0.2). In a multivariate regression analysis, CKD was associated with increased risks of first year MACE (OR 2.1; 95% confidence interval 1.0-4.3, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PCI with drug-eluting balloons was associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with than without CKD. However, rates of target lesion revascularization were similar in the two groups. Shorter duration of dual anti-platelet therapy was observed in the CKD group.

Drug-Eluting Stents and Balloons-Materials, Structure Designs, and Coating Techniques: A Review.

Controlled drug delivery is a matter of interest to numerous scientists from various domains, as well as an essential issue for society as a whole. In the treatment of many diseases, it is crucial to control the dosing of a drug for a long time and thus maintain its optimal concentration in the tissue. Heart diseases are particularly important in this aspect. One such disease is an obstructive arterial disease affecting millions of people around the world. In recent years, stents and balloon catheters have reached a significant position in the treatment of this condition. Balloon catheters are also successfully used to manage tear ducts, paranasal sinuses, or salivary glands disorders. Modern technology is continually striving to improve the results of previous generations of stents and balloon catheters by refining their design, structure, and constituent materials. These advances result in the development of both successive models of drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-eluting balloons (DEB). This paper presents milestones in the development of DES and DEB, which are a significant option in the treatment of coronary artery diseases. This report reviews the works related to achievements in construction designs and materials, as well as preparation technologies, of DES and DEB. Special attention was paid to the polymeric biodegradable materials used in the production of the above-mentioned devices. Information was also collected on the various methods of producing drug release coatings and their effectiveness in releasing the active substance.

Outcomes with Drug-Coated Balloons in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Diabetic Patients.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remains associated with inferior clinical outcomes and an increased risk of restenosis compared with non-diabetics even in the era of drug-eluting stents (DES). The outcomes with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in diabetic patients have received limited study. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of all studies published between January 2000 and January 2019 reporting the outcomes with DCB vs. DES after PCI of de-novo coronary lesions in diabetic patients. Outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), binary restenosis by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), and late lumen loss (LLL). RESULTS: Three studies with 378 patients (440 lesions) were included in the meta-analysis. During 17.3 ±â€¯11.3 months follow-up, DCB were associated with a similar risk of MACE (OR: 0.63, 95% CI [0.36, 1.12], p = 0.11), TLR (OR: 0.51, 95% CI [0.25, 1.06] p = 0.07), binary restenosis (OR: 0.42, 95% CI [0.09, 1.92], p = 0.26), and LLL (mean difference: -0.13 mm, 95% CI [-0.41, 0.14], p = 0.34) compared with DES. CONCLUSION: In diabetic patients with de-novo coronary lesions undergoing PCI, DCBs are associated with similar outcomes compared with first-generation DES, with a signal toward potential benefit in lowering target lesion revascularization. Further randomized studies are needed to compare the newer-generation DCBs and DES in this setting.

Drug-eluting balloons versus new generation drug-eluting stents for the management of in-stent restenosis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized studies.

BACKGROUND: New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) was more effective in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) compared with the first-generation DES. Drug-eluting balloons (DEB) and new-generation DES had been available strategies in treatment of bare-metal stents/DES ISR (BMS/DES-ISR). Six new randomized trials have recently examined the angiographic outcomes and one-year clinical outcomes of DEB and new generation DES in BMS/DES-ISR. However, the optimal management for BMS/DES-ISR lesions remains controversial. METHODS: We searched the randomized clinical trials evaluating the angiographic outcomes and one-year clinical outcomes of DEB and new-generation DES in patients with BMS/DES-ISR. The primary endpoints were the angiographic outcomes, including the minimal luminal diameter (MLD), diameter stenosis % (DS%), late lumen loss (LLL), and binary restenosis (BR). RESULTS: A total of six randomized clinical trials with 1177 BMS/DES-ISR patients were included in our meta-analysis. For angiographic outcomes, there were significantly less MLD and more DS% with DEB compared to new-generation DES (MLD: MD = -0.18, 95% CI: -0.31- -0.04, P < 0.001; DS%: MD = 5.68, 95% CI: 1.00-10.37, P < 0.001). Moreover, for one-year clinical outcomes, DEB was associated with a significant increase risk in target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR = 2.93, 95% CI: 1.50-5.72, P = 0.002). However, DEB was associated with higher risks of major adverse cardiac event, target vessel revascularization, TLR, BR, and more DS% only in DES-ISR group. CONCLUSIONS: DEB and new-generation DES have the similar clinical efficacy for the treatment of BMS-ISR. However, DES showed more MLD, less DS%, and a decreased risk of TLR for the treatment of DES-ISR.

Nanoparticle eluting-angioplasty balloons to treat cardiovascular diseases.

Nanoparticles (NPs) can be used to locally deliver anti-restenosis drugs when they are infused directly to the injured arteries after intervention procedures such as angioplasty. However, the efficacy of transferring NPs via infusion to the arterial wall is limited, at least partially, due to poor NP retention on the inner artery wall. To improve NP retention, angioplasty balloons coated with drug-loaded NPs were fabricated via either layer-by-layer (LbL) electrostatic coating or acrylic-based hydrogel (AAH) coating techniques. Three types of NPs, namely poly (lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA), biodegradable photo-luminescent PLGA and urethane doped polyester were studied. The transfer efficacy of NPs from various coatings to the arterial wall were further evaluated to find the optimal coating conditions. The ex vivo NP transfer studies showed significantly more NPs being transferred to the rat arterial wall after the angioplasty procedure by the AAH coating (95% transfer efficiency) compared to that of the LbL technique (60%) and dip coating (20%) under flow conditions (10 dyn/cm2). Our results suggest that the AAH coating of drug-loaded NPs on the angioplasty balloon could potentially provide superior retention of drug-loaded NPs onto the arterial wall for a better local delivery of drug-loaded NPs to effectively treat arterial diseases.

Outcomes with drug-coated balloons in small-vessel coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of small-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) is associated with increased risk of restenosis. The use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in SVD has received limited study. OBJECTIVES: To assess the outcomes of DCB in the treatment of SVD compared with the standard of care. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of all studies published between January 2000 and September 2018 reporting the outcomes of DCB versus other modalities in the treatment of de novo SVD. RESULTS: Seven studies with 1,824 patients (1,938 lesions) were included (four randomized controlled trials and three observational studies). During a mean follow-up of 14.5 ± 10 months, DCBs were associated with a similar risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.54, 1.84, P = 97) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.51, 1.45, P = 0.57) compared with drug-eluting stents (DES). During a mean follow-up of 7 ± 1.5 months, DCBs were associated with a significantly lower risk of TLR (OR: 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.88, P = 0.03) and binary restenosis (OR: 0.17, 95% CI 0.08-0.37, P = <0.00001) compared with noncoated balloon angioplasty. CONCLUSION: The use of DCBs in SVD is associated with comparable outcomes when compared with DES and favorable outcomes when compared with balloon angioplasty.

Outcomes With Drug-Coated Balloons for Treating the Side Branch of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Treating coronary bifurcations remains limited by technical difficulties and suboptimal long-term outcomes, often affecting the side branch (SB). Drug-coated balloon (DCB) in SB treatment could reduce neointimal hyperplasia and the risk for restenosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all studies published between January 2000 and February 2018 reporting the outcomes of DCB vs non-coated balloon angioplasty (BA) in the treatment of the SB in coronary bifurcation lesions. Outcomes included SB late lumen loss, SB binary restenosis, target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate. RESULTS: Four studies with 349 patients were included in the meta-analysis (three randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and one observational study). SB stenting was performed in 7.5% vs 8.6% in the DCB and BA groups, respectively. Angiographic follow-up performed after a mean follow-up of 9.1 ± 2.1 months demonstrated that DCB was associated with lower SB late lumen loss compared with BA (mean difference, -0.19 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.37 to -0.01; P=.04). There was no difference in the risk of SB binary restenosis (odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.18-1.47; P=.22). During a mean follow-up of 15.1 ± 5.8 months, DCB and BA had similar risk of MACE (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.4-1.4; P=.40), and TLR (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.3-2.4; P=.76). CONCLUSION: Assessment of DCB for SB treatment of coronary bifurcations is limited by low power due to the small number of patients studied. Use of DCB was associated with lower SB late lumen loss, but this did not translate into improved clinical outcomes.

Adjunctive stent use during endovascular intervention to the femoropopliteal artery with drug coated balloons: Insights from the XLPAD registry.

With growing use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) for femoropopliteal (FP) artery interventions, there is limited information on rates of real-world adjunctive stent use and its association with short and long-term outcomes. We report on 225 DCB treated FP lesions in 224 patients from the Excellence in Peripheral Artery Disease (XLPAD) registry (NCT01904851) between 2014 and 2016. Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel and Wilcoxon rank sum statistics were used to compare stented (planned or 'bail-out') versus non-stented DCB treated lesions. Stents were implanted in 31% of FP DCB interventions. Among the 70 stents implanted, 46% were for 'bail-out' indications and 54% were planned. Lesions treated with stents were longer (mean 150 mm vs 100 mm; p < 0.001) and less likely to be in-stent restenosis lesions (10% vs 28%; p=0.003). Stenting was significantly more frequent in complex FP lesions, including chronic total occlusions (66% vs 34%; p < 0.001). For bail-out stenting, interwoven nitinol stents were the most common type (50%) followed by drug-eluting stents (34%) and bare-metal stents (22%). There were no differences in peri-procedural complication rates or 12-month target limb revascularization rates (18.6% vs 11.6%; p=0.162) or 12-month amputation rates (11.4% vs 11%; p=0.92) between lesions where adjunctive stenting was used versus lesions without adjunctive stenting, respectively. In conclusion, in a contemporary 'real-world' adjudicated multicenter US registry, adjunctive stenting was necessary in nearly a third of the lesions, primarily for the treatment of more complex FP lesions, with similar short and intermediate-term clinical outcomes compared with non-stented lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01904851.

Drug-eluting balloons with provisional bail-out or adjunctive stenting in de novo coronary artery lesions-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) for treatment of de novo coronary lesions remains controversial. The present systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials assessed DEB with bare-metal stents (BMS) and also DEB with provisional bail-out stents ('DEB-only' strategy), to other conventional options: plain-old balloon angioplasty (POBA), BMS and drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: A systematic literature search from January 2000 until May 2017 was conducted. Primary outcome measure, late lumen loss (LLL); and secondary outcomes; binary restenosis, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular death and stent thrombosis were analysed. RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs were included with 2,616 patients. Several comparative groups showed significant differences. DEB with BMS were inferior to DES for LLL [mean difference (MD) =0.12 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.03 to 0.22; P=0.01]; and binary restenosis [risk ratio (RR) =1.89; (CI, 1.13 to 3.18); P=0.02]. DEB with BMS was superior to BMS for LLL [MD =-0.27 mm; (-0.45 to -0.10); P=0.002]; and MACE [RR =0.64; (0.46 to 0.90); P=0.010]. Finally, DEB alone was superior to POBA for LLL [MD =-0.39 mm; (-0.67 to -0.11); P=0.006] and binary restenosis [RR =0.20; (0.05 to 0.85); P=0.03] in bifurcation lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis showed that whilst DEB with BMS is superior to BMS alone, the combination is inferior to DES for treatment of de novo coronary lesions. Thus, DEB + BMS should not be applied in de novo lesions unless in patients who have absolute contraindications to DES. DEB alone, however, should be considered for relative contraindications to DES such as small vessel disease and bifurcation lesions.

Thirty-six-month outcomes of drug-eluting balloon angioplasty in the infrapopliteal arteries.

Objectives To evaluate 36-month outcomes of drug-eluting balloons in infrapopliteal (=below-the-knee) arterial segments, we made a prospective registry enrolling patients (Rutherford class 2 to 5, ankle-brachial index 0.4-0.7) who were revascularized with drug-eluting balloon from August 2011 to December 2014. Methods Three hundred and seven infrapopliteal arteries were revascularized only with drug-eluting balloon. Endpoints included target lesion revascularization, primary patency rate, and changes in ankle-brachial index and Rutherford class. Results Both ankle-brachial index improvement and Rutherford reduction were statistically significant (p < 0.001). At 36 months control, ankle-brachial index improvement was 59.3% (p = 0.032). The clinically driven target lesion revascularization rate was 28% at 36 months. Limb salvage was accomplished in 73.6% of the critical limb ischemia cases, and complete wound healing was detected in 67.8% of cases with Rutherford category 5. Overall, the 1-year primary patency rate was 32.5%. Conclusions Drug-eluting balloons have shown successful performance in infrapopliteal arteries in mid-term, and evidence regarding clinical effectiveness and safety supports drug-eluting balloon angioplasty as the first line therapy in this segment.