RESUMEN

Background: The effects of the drug-coated balloon (DCB)-only strategy in the treatment of chronic total occlusion (CTO) coronary lesions remain controversial. Patients who underwent an in-stent restenosis (ISR) CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) had a significantly poorer prognosis than those who underwent a de novo CTO PCI. This retrospective analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of the DCB-only strategy in the treatment of CTO lesions, and the factors associated with adverse events in the patients. Methods: Patients with CTO lesions who were treated with the DCB-only strategy from 1 January 2016 to 1 May 2021 were retrospectively enrolled in this study. The patients were stratified into the ISR and de novo (primary) groups. All the patients were re-admitted to the hospital and underwent clinical and/or angiographic follow-up. Results: Of the 68 patients with CTO lesions, 38 (55.9%) were categorized as having ISR, and 30 (44.1%) were categorized as having de novo lesions. The outcomes measured included target lesion revascularization (TLR), lumen gain after intervention, and late lumen loss (LLL). After an average follow-up period of 16 months, a total of 15 patients experienced target lesion failure (13 in the ISR group and 2 in the de novo group). The rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) was significantly lower in the de novo group than the ISR group (10% vs. 39%, P=0.004). There was a significant difference in LLL between the two groups, with the de novo group showing a decrease (-0.04±0.83 mm) and the ISR group showing an increase (0.97±1.45 mm) (P=0.03). The univariable Cox proportional hazard analyses revealed that the incidence of TLR was independently associated with the stenosis type (either ISR or de novo lesions) [odds ratio (OR): 7.28; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.494-35.464; P=0.01]. Male gender (OR: 3.726; 95% CI: 1.014-12.818; P=0.03) and body mass index (BMI) (OR: 1.246; 95% CI: 1.022-1.518, P=0.03) were also associated with the incidence of TLR. However, after adjusting for the variables of age, gender, and BMI, no significant association was found between MACE occurrence and ISR (OR: 4.156, 95% CI: 0.734-23.522; P=0.11). Conclusions: Treatment using the DCB-only strategy was found to be beneficial for patients suffering from CTO coronary lesions, especially those presenting with de novo lesions.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To compare primary patency after angioplasty with drug-coated balloon (DCB)-Passeo-18Lux, BIOTRONIK versus uncoated balloon in dysfunctional peripheral vascular access (PVA) for hemodialysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 133 patients from four hospitals were randomized to receive DCB or plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) after satisfactory treatment (residual stenosis <30%) with high pressure balloon (HPB). The primary endpoint was clinical patency of PVA 2 years after angioplasty. Secondary endpoints included the relationship between the location of stenosis and patency and also, other covariates. Mortality at 2 years was compared between both groups. RESULTS: Patency measured in days after angioplasty was higher in fistulae dilated with DCB than HPB. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed the next percent of success (free time restenosis) after DCB versus POBA at 6 months-77.1% versus 58.2% (160.41-143.72 days until restenosis), 12 months-51.4% versus 44.3% (274.1-237.23), 18 months-38.6% versus 38% (350.74-305.18), and 24 months-37.1% versus 30.4% (419.04-369.1). At 6 months, this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.018), but not at 12 (p = 0.225), 18 (p = 0.471), or 24 months (p = 0.236). Mortality was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: DCB angioplasty resulted in superior target lesion primary patency (TLPP)-free survival at 6 months of follow-up. No significant improvements in TLPP-free survival long term were observed. Mortality observed at 1 and 2 years was similar in DCB and POBA: there was no significant difference, and a safety study demonstrated no difference between the two groups (complications and mortality): DCB is safe to use in stenosis treatment in patients who are PVA carriers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level Ia, therapeutic study, RCT. EBM ratings will be based on a scale of 1-5.

RESUMEN

Because there is a lack of comparative studies assessing drug-coated balloon (DCB) and drug-eluting stent (DES) outcomes with respect to intraluminal (IL) and subintimal (SI) approaches in femoropopliteal (FP) total occlusive lesions, we compared the outcomes between DCB (including bailout stenting) and DES treatments for this lesion. A total of 487 limbs (434 patients) were divided into the IL (n = 344, DCB: n = 268, DES: n = 76) and SI (n = 143, DCB: n = 83, DES: n = 60) approach groups. The primary outcome was a major adverse limb event (MALE), defined as above-ankle amputation or repeat revascularization of the index limb. Secondary outcomes included clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR), loss of clinical patency, and all-cause death. After adjustment, in each IL and SI approach, the 2-year rates of MALE (p = 0.180 and p = 0.236, respectively), TLR, loss of clinical patency, and all-cause death were similar between the DCB and DES groups. In the DCB and DES groups, both primary and secondary outcomes were similar between the IL and SI approaches. DCB and DES strategies for patients presenting with FP total occlusive lesions demonstrated similar outcomes regardless of the IL or SI approach.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02748226.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Although the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) for acute left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease have not yet been proven, stentless percutaneous coronary intervention with a DCB is preferred for patients with high bleeding risk requiring a shorter duration of dual antiplatelet therapy. Mechanical circulatory support may improve haemodynamics in patients with cardiogenic shock caused by acute LMCA disease. Case summary: A 74-year-old man diagnosed with acute congestive heart failure underwent emergency coronary angiography (CAG) at our hospital owing to ischaemic changes on the electrocardiogram (ECG), indicating acute LMCA disease. Coronary angiography revealed severe LMCA ostial stenosis. Immediately after CAG, mechanical circulatory support was initiated using Impella CP® for haemodynamic collapse with abrupt ST-segment elevation in the precordial leads. The haemodynamics stabilized with a dramatic improvement in the ECG. We treated the culprit ostial lesion with inflation of a cutting balloon followed by DCB delivery because of an episode of haematochezia. Subsequently, his cardiac function recovered fully. Discussion: A case of acute LMCA disease was successfully treated with a DCB under haemodynamic support using Impella CP. The left ventricular (LV) unloading with Impella was indicated to contribute to stable haemodynamics, even during long inflation with the DCB, and the immediate recovery of LV function. Haemodynamic support using Impella may be effective, especially in cases requiring repeated and longer inflation of balloon catheters accompanied by extensive myocardial ischaemia.

RESUMEN

Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) may be a viable alternative to drug-eluting stents (DES) for de novo small caliber coronary artery lesions. However, there remains a lack of data regarding the long-term efficacy of this approach. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after 3-year follow-up among patients randomized to DCB versus DES for the treatment of small caliber coronary arteries with reference vessel diameter between 2 and 3 mm. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases from their inception to July 2023 for randomized controlled trials comparing DCB versus DES for small caliber coronary artery disease. The primary end point was MACE at 3-year follow-up. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2). Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using random effects meta-analytic models. Results: Four randomized controlled trials (n = 1,402) were included. In total, 706 patients were randomized to DCB and 696 to DES. Participants were mostly male (74%), with a mean/median age ranging from 60 to 68 years. Pooled data across trials for MACE showed wide CIs, with little indication of DES superiority over DCB (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.36-1.41). Most individual components of MACE were inconclusive. There was a potential signal for a reduction of target vessel thrombosis with DCB compared to DES (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.06-1.08). Conclusions: Although sample sizes are small, 3-year outcomes suggest that DCB may be a reasonable alternative to DES for the treatment of small coronary arteries.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of drug-coated balloon (DCB) with high-dose paclitaxel for the treatment of restenotic dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-arm, multicenter, prospective, observational study, 334 patients using IN.PACT AV DCB (Medtronic Inc., Plymouth, MN) for the first time in the restenotic lesion of dysfunctional AVF between April 2021 and March 2022 were registered. RESULTS: Procedural success, defined as <30% residual stenosis, was achieved in 96.7% of cases. During a median follow-up of 7.4 months, 179 target lesion reinterventions (TLRs) were observed, and the 6-month freedom from TLR was 73.2% (68.2%-78.2%). When compared with the previous plain percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, the median time to reintervention was significantly longer with DCB (9.1 [8.0-10.6] versus 3.2 [3.0-3.4] months; P<.001). Baseline characteristics that were independently associated with TLR were: months from the last intervention (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.50 [95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.62] per doubling; P<.001), partial lesion coverage by DCB (2.13 [1.10-4.12]; P=.024), and residual stenosis after DCB (2.19 [1.53-3.12] per 15% increase; P<.001) with its time interaction (0.91 [0.86-0.97] per month; P=.003). Of the 179 TLRs, 84 used DCB once again. The median time to reintervention was significantly longer for TLR using DCB (7.1 [6.2-9.7] versus 3.3 [3.1-4.0] months; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: DCB with high-dose paclitaxel is effective at both the initial treatment in the restenotic lesion of dysfunctional AVF and during TLR after DCB use. However, partial lesion coverage by DCB and residual stenosis should be avoided.

RESUMEN

Multiple clinical trials have reported favorable outcomes after drug-coated balloon therapy for peripheral artery disease in above-the-knee and below-the-knee lesions and in both de novo and in-stent restenosis. However, there are still insufficient data to identify and tackle the risk factors associated with a higher risk of restenosis, which is the primary concern for patients who are treated with an endovascular approach. A modern armamentarium, which includes improved lesion preparation techniques such as plaque modification balloons, mechanical atherectomy, intravascular lithotripsy, and imaging, is crucial for obtaining better long-term clinical outcomes. Moreover, a better understanding of the molecular properties of drug-coated balloons has led to improved devices that could tackle the shortcomings of previous generations. This comprehensive review focuses on drug-coated balloon technology as a tool to treat peripheral artery disease and the effects of the molecular mechanisms involved in preventing vascular restenosis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an attractive strategy for the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). The implantation technique strongly influences the outcome of DCB PCI: accurate and adequate lesion preparation, short delivery time and sufficient DCB inflation time are deemed crucial to warrant adequate drug transfer and mitigate the risk of immediate vessel recoil and flow-limiting dissections. However, the optimal DCB inflation time is unclear, current consensus documents suggesting 30-60 s based on Experts' opinion. However, clinical studies comparing the prognostic role of different inflation times are scarce and mainly involve paclitaxel-coated balloons. In this study we aimed to assess the impact of different inflation times in patients undergoing PCI with a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB). METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the prospective, multicenter, EASTBOURNE study, classified into two study groups according to balloon inflation time: long (>30 s) versus short (≤30 s). The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 24-month follow-up. Secondary clinical endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACE), death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and BARC 2-5 bleedings. Furthermore, angiographic endpoints (the rate of bailout stenting and post-procedural TIMI flow <3) were also addressed. RESULTS: A total of 2289 lesions (2092 in the long inflation group, 197 in the short inflation group) were included in the analysis. Median balloon inflation time was 60 s in the long inflation and 30 s in the short inflation group. The two study groups experienced a similar rate of TLR [6.2 % in the short versus 6.3 % in the long inflation group, p = 1.00] as well MACE (p = 0.683), death (p = 0.102), non-fatal MI (p = 0.822), and BARC 2-5 bleedings (p = 0.252). These results were consistent when considering subpopulations with different target lesion phenotypes (in-stent restenosis, de-novo lesions, large and small vessels). Interesting, the rate of bailout stent implantation and post-procedural TIMI flow <3 was higher in the short SCB inflation time, as compared to the standard strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Short vs. long SCB inflation time is associated with a higher need of bailout stenting after PCI with SCB, with similar clinical outcomes at 24-month follow-up.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stents (DES) are two widely used treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR). Focal and non-focal types of ISR affect the clinical outcomes. The present study aims to compare DES reimplantation versus DCB angioplasty in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with focal ISR and non-focal ISR lesions. METHODS: Patients with ISR lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were retrospectively evaluated and divided into DES group and DCB group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) at 24 months follow up. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance the baseline characteristics. RESULTS: For focal ISR, TLF was comparable in the DES and DCB groups at 24 months of follow-up (Before PSM, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-1.27; p = 0.244; After PSM, HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.40-1.73; p = 0.625). For non-focal ISR, TLF was significantly decreased in DES compared with DCB group (Before PSM, HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.29-0.63; p < 0.001; After PSM, HR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.19-0.59; p < 0.001), which was mainly attributed to the lower incidence of clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) (Before PSM, HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.26-0.59; p < 0.001; After PSM, HR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.15-0.54; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical outcomes for DES and DCB treatment are similar in focal type of ISR lesions. For non-focal ISR, the treatment of DES showed a significant decrease in TLF which was mainly attributed to a lower incidence of CD-TLR.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in complex coronary artery disease (CAD) has been established as the standard of care, but stent-related events are not uncommon. Sirolimus-Coated Balloon (SCB)-based angioplasty is an emerging technology, although it needs to be thoroughly evaluated compared with DES in the complex PCI setting. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of SCB-based angioplasty compared with new-generation DES in complex PCI. METHODS: Net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE: all-cause death, target lesion revascularization, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and major bleedings according to BARC classification), as a primary study endpoint was compared between SCB and new-generation DES for complex coronary lesions. RESULTS: Among 1782 patients with complex CAD, 1076 were treated with a sirolimus-coated balloon (EASTBOURNE Registry) and 706 with new-generation DES (COMPLEX Registry). After propensity score matching, a total of 512 patients in both groups were analyzed. NACE occurred more significantly in the DES group during the 1-year follow-up (10.5% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.003), mainly due to a higher risk of bleeding (6.6% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.001). The Cox model adjusted for lesion length showed a significantly lower hazard of NACE (HR: 0.23, CI [0.10, 0.52], p < 0.001) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.07, CI [0.01, 0.66], p = 0.020) in SCB compared to DES group. CONCLUSIONS: SCB angioplasty has an advantage over DES for the treatment of complex CAD regarding NACE, significantly reducing the incidence of major bleeding without increasing ischemic endpoints. SCB may be an alternative to DES in selected patients with complex coronary lesions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the local, downstream, and systemic effects of 2 different paclitaxel-coated balloons. DESIGN: Preclinical study in healthy peripheral arteries of a swine model, with randomized allocation of the distribution of the devices: the test paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) (LuminorⓇ), a control PCB (IN.PACTⓇ), and a plain angioplasty balloon (OceanusⓇ), considering single (1×) and overlapping (3×) doses with simple blind histologic analysis. METHODS: Twenty animals underwent balloon angioplasty at 1× or 3× doses in the external and internal branches of both femoral arteries and were followed-up for 28 days. Postprocedural and follow-up angiography were carried out. Comprehensive necropsy and histology were used to evaluate the local, downstream and systemic effects. RESULTS: Angioplasty was successfully carried out in all animals. Significant protocol deviations appeared in 3 arteries (treated with Oceanus®) without clinical relevance. Those samples were excluded from the analysis. All the animals survived the follow-up period without major clinical issues. Local signs of drug toxicity were less marked with Luminor® than IN.PACT® at 1× dose, including endothelial loss (P = .0828), intima/media inflammation (P = .0004), transmural medial smooth muscle cell (SMC) loss (P = .0016), wall thickness loss (P = .0141), presence of fibrin in the vascular wall (P = .0054), and adventitial inflammation (P = .0080). A similar pattern was observed at the 3× dose for endothelial loss (P = .0011), intima/media inflammation (P < .0001), circumferential SMC loss (P = .0004), medial SMC replacement with proteoglycans (P = .0014), fibrin (P = .0034), and collagen content (P = .0205). Downstream vascular histologic changes were mild although more prevalent in the IN.PACT® 3× group (P = .006). No systemic effects of toxicity were detected in any of the samples analyzed. CONCLUSION: Luminor® showed better healing pattern (lower inflammation, and endothelial and muscular loss) than IN.PACT® balloon. The effect was evident at single and triple doses. The prevalence of downstream lesions, albeit low, was higher with the triple dose of IN.PACT® compared with Luminor®.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a significant challenge in interventional cardiology despite advancements in stent technology. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs), which deliver antiproliferative agents directly to the vessel wall, have emerged as a promising alternative to plain balloon angioplasty for ISR treatment. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of DCBs compared to plain balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary ISR. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase was conducted on June 27, 2024. The search identified randomized controlled trials comparing DCBs and plain balloon angioplasty for ISR treatment. Six trials involving 1,322 patients met the inclusion criteria. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Data extraction and statistical analysis were performed using RevMan software, assessing heterogeneity with the I2 statistic and publication bias using funnel plots. RESULTS: The analysis showed that DCBs significantly reduced late in-stent and in-segment luminal loss (P < 0.001) and target lesion revascularization (P = 0.02) compared to plain balloon angioplasty. Major adverse cardiovascular events and the combined endpoint of target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, and death also showed highly significant improvements with DCB treatment (P < 0.00001 and P = 0.0002, respectively). However, no significant effect was observed on myocardial infarction and mortality rates. CONCLUSION: DCBs significantly reduce in-stent late luminal loss, target lesion revascularization, and major adverse cardiovascular events compared to plain balloon angioplasty.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: While not available for clinical use in the United States, dedicated drug-coated balloons (DCB) are currently under investigation for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). Peripheral drug-coated balloons (P-DCB) have been used off-label for coronary ISR. Further data regarding this practice are needed. We aimed to describe outcomes in patients who underwent off-label P-DCB angioplasty for coronary ISR. Methods: We analyzed data on P-DCB angioplasty for coronary ISR at a single high-volume center between April 1, 2015, and December 30, 2017. Demographic and procedural details were collected, with systematic follow-up as clinically indicated. Results: Data from 31 patients treated with P-DCB angioplasty (mean age 68.0 ± 10.7 years) with coronary ISR (17 recurrent and 14 first time) were analyzed. Most patients presented with high-grade angina (81%) or myocardial infarction (13%). Treated ISR lesions were in native coronary arteries (68%), saphenous vein grafts (SVG, 23%), and the left internal mammary artery (10%). Diffuse intrastent ISR was common (69%) with a mean lesion length of 21.7 ± 12.4 mm. No postprocedural myocardial infarction occurred and 1 nonprocedural mortality occurred during index admission. At follow-up (median: 283, interquartile range [IQR]: 354 days), repeat angiography was performed in 19 patients (median: 212, IQR: 188 days), and 11 patients had target lesion recurrent ISR (Kaplan-Meier event-free survival estimate: 44.7%, 95% CI, 26.1%-76.5%). Conclusions: In the absence of availability of dedicated coronary DCB, treatment of coronary ISR using P-DCB angioplasty was feasible, although follow-up demonstrated continued risk for recurrent ISR in this high-risk population.

RESUMEN

Background: In percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of de novo lesions, drug-coated balloons (DCB) have been shown to be a promising strategy to improve clinical outcomes of patients with small vessel disease. Evidence of this strategy in PCI of de novo coronary lesions in a real-world setting is limited. The objective of this study was to compare the 12-month outcomes of 2 paclitaxel-coated balloon systems for the treatment of all de novo coronary artery lesions. Methods: All patients who were treated for de novo coronary artery stenosis with either SeQuent Please or In.Pact Falcon DCB at a single center from January 2014 to December 2018 were included. The primary end point was the composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (3-point major adverse cardiovascular events) at 12 months. Results: A total of 496 patients with 623 lesions, of which 144 were treated with SeQuent Please and 352 were treated with In.Pact Falcon were included in the study. Baseline patient, lesion and procedural characteristics at baseline were similar between groups. At 12-month follow-up, 3-point major adverse cardiovascular event outcomes were similar (4.2% vs 2.3% respectively; P = .272). Deaths due to cardiovascular events were few and similar between groups (2.7% vs 1.1% respectively; P = .20). Conclusions: Both paclitaxel DCB systems have similar efficacy and safety outcomes, suggesting that both may be an appropriate treatment choice for patients with de novo lesions. However, a larger randomized controlled study is needed to confirm these findings.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Previous reports have shown comparable outcomes between drug-eluting stents (DESs) and drug-coated balloons (DCBs) for treating femoropopliteal artery (FPA) lesions; however, DCB outcomes include approximately 10% to 50% bailout stents. Therefore, comparing DESs and DCBs is not simple. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of DESs and DCBs in patients with symptomatic FPA disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the registries of 7 institutions, we retrospectively reviewed the records of 1356 patients who underwent endovascular therapy for FPA with DESs (n=333; Eluvia, 74.0%; Zilver PTX stent, 26.0%) or DCBs without bailout stents (n=1023; IN.PACT, 67.6%; Lutonix, 32.4%). The primary outcome was the 1-year primary patency comparison between DESs and DCBs, using propensity score matching. The severity of the dissection pattern after predilatation (none or grades A-C) was included as an explanatory variable for matching. Patients with grade D dissections were excluded from the main analysis and assessed independently. RESULTS: After matching, the 1-year primary patency between DESs and DCBs was similar (88.8% vs 85.2%, p=0.31). By contrast, perioperative complications were frequent with DES, compared with DCB (5.1% vs 2.2%, p=0.005), and the intravascular ultrasound-evaluated minimum luminal area was significantly larger with DES than with DCB (19 mm2 vs 14 mm2, p<0.001). In the supplemental analysis of lesions with grade D dissection, the 1-year primary patency was significantly higher with DES than with DCB (86.1% vs 55.1%, p=0.014). CONCLUSION: In FPA lesions without severe dissection (ie, no dissection or grade A-C dissection), DESs and DCBs showed comparable 1-year primary patency in matched populations. However, DCBs did not perform well with severe dissection (ie, grade D or more). CLINICAL IMPACT: The results of this study clearly define the appropriate boundaries for the "leaving nothing behind" strategy. Clinicians can now more clearly differentiate between the use of DES and DCB, based on the results of lesion preparation. Further prospective investigations with well-designed trials and larger populations are necessary to confirm these findings.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty in the treatment of thrombosed arteriovenous fistulas. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, controlled study investigated the use of drug-eluting balloons in the treatment of the thrombosis of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) at our center between January 2018 and January 2023. A total of 246 patients were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 61.3 ± 11.5 years. Of the patients, 150 (61%) were male and 96 (39%) were female. Angioplasty was performed using a plain balloon (PB) in 126 patients (51.2%) and a drug-coated balloon (DCB) in 120 (48.8%). The control images of the patients were obtained at the sixth and 12th months. Patency was evaluated during the follow-up. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, fistula location, or stenosis length. No significant difference was observed between the groups regarding the number of complications observed during and after the procedure. At the end of the sixth month, the patency rate was found to be 86.7% in the DCB group and 78.6% in the PB group. The 12th-month patency rate was 77.5% in the DCB group and 57.9% in the PB group. A significant difference was detected between the two groups in relation to the 6th- and 12th-month patency rates (p = 0.034 and p = 0.046, respectively). CONCLUSION: Drug-coated balloon angioplasty is an effective approach to the treatment of thrombosed AVFs, especially in terms of prolonging primary patency and reducing the need for secondary procedures.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the mid-term outcomes of the use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) to treat infrainguinal peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in patients with dyslipidemia. METHODS: BIOLUX P-III is a prospective, international, multicenter, all-comers registry-based study that was conducted at 44 sites with follow-ups at 6, 12 and 24 months. The present study is a subgroup analysis comparing the outcomes associated with endovascular revascularization with those associated with Passeo-18 lux DCBs in patients with and without dyslipidemia. The proportions of patients free from major adverse events (defined as device- or procedure-related mortality within 30 days, clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) and major target limb amputation), target vessel revascularization, and patient-reported outcomes within 24 months postintervention were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 876 patients with symptomatic PAD who underwent peripheral revascularization with DCBs and had information on their dyslipidemia status were included; 588 of those patients had dyslipidemia. There was no difference in the proportion of patients free from MAEs between the groups. The percentages of patients who were 6, 12 and 24 months free from CD-TLR were significantly lower in the dyslipidemia group than in the nondyslipidemia group (86.3% vs 91.9% at 2 years, p = .0183). Similarly, the percentage of patients free from target vessel revascularization was lower in the dyslipidemia group at all timepoints (83.3% vs 89.3% at 2 years, p = .0203). There was no difference in mortality or major or minor limb amputation rates. Other secondary outcomes were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to those without dyslipidemia, patients with symptomatic PAD and dyslipidemia who underwent revascularization with a Passeo-18 lux DCB had greater rates of CD-TLR and TVR. However, having dyslipidemia did not increase the risk of mortality or limb amputation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02276313.

RESUMEN

Background: In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a significant clinical problem. It is estimated that 10-20% of patients who develop a first event of ISR will develop recurrent ISR (R-ISR). However, the pathology of R-ISR remains largely unknown, and recommendations for its optimal management are lacking. In this case report, we discuss the effectiveness of directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) as an atherectomy device and the mechanism of R-ISR based on pathological findings obtained from DCA. Case summary: We report the case of a 62-year-old man with a history of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to the mid left circumflex artery using a bare metal stent. Even after the introduction of adequate secondary prevention therapy for ISR, the patient underwent a total of six PCI sessions over 10 years following primary PCI for R-ISR. Eventually, the decision was made to institute treatment with DCA and a drug-coated balloon. No symptoms of restenosis were observed over the following 4 years. Discussion: In this case report, we demonstrate the effectiveness of DCA treatment for debulking a wide range of collagen-rich plaques and show that DCA treatment should be considered for the treatment of R-ISR.