RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Reestenosis Coronaria , Diseño de Prótesis , Humanos , Factores de Tiempo , Masculino , Resultado del Tratamiento , Femenino , Estudios Prospectivos , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Factores de Riesgo , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Stents , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoAsunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Humanos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Catéteres Cardíacos , Diseño de Equipo , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that drug-coated balloons may benefit in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment. However, the efficacy of new-generation sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) compared with the latest generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) has not been studied in this setting. METHODS: All patients in the EASTBORNE (The All-Comers Sirolimus-Coated Balloon European Registry) and DEB-DRAGON (DEB vs Thin-DES in DES-ISR: Long Term Outcomes) registries undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for DES-ISR were included in the study. The primary study end point was target lesion revascularization at 24 months. Secondary end points were major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 24 months. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCB versus thin-struts DES in ISR at long-term follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 1545 patients with 1679 ISR lesions were included in the pooled analysis, of whom 621 (40.2%) patients with 621 lesions were treated with thin-strut DES and 924 (59.8%) patients with 1045 lesions were treated with SCB. The unmatched cohort showed no differences in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (10.8% versus 11.8%; P=0.568); however, there was a trend toward lower rates of myocardial infarction (7.4% versus 5.0%; P=0.062) and major adverse cardiovascular events (20.8% versus 17.1%; P=0.072) in the SCB group. After propensity score matching (n=335 patients per group), there were no significant differences in the rates of target lesion revascularization (11.6% versus 11.8%; P=0.329), target vessel revascularization (14.0% versus 13.1%; P=0.822), myocardial infarction (7.2% versus 4.5%; P=0.186), all-cause death (5.7% versus 4.2%; P=0.476), and major adverse cardiovascular event (21.5% versus 17.6%; P=0.242) between DES and SCB treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ISR, angioplasty with SCB compared with thin-struts DES is associated with comparable rates of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, all-cause death, and major adverse cardiovascular events at 2 years.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Sistema de Registros , Sirolimus , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/mortalidad , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Factores de Tiempo , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/mortalidad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Diseño de Prótesis , Europa (Continente) , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Catéteres Cardíacos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagenAsunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Reestenosis Coronaria , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Sirolimus , Humanos , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Catéteres CardíacosAsunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Catéteres Cardíacos , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Humanos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Factores de Riesgo , Diseño de Equipo , Stents Liberadores de FármacosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the outcomes with limus drug-coated balloons (DCBs) vs paclitaxel DCBs were small and underpowered for clinical endpoints. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the angiographic and clinical outcomes with limus DCBs vs paclitaxel DCBs for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: An electronic search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was performed through January 2024 for RCTs comparing limus DCBs vs paclitaxel DCBs for PCI. The primary endpoint was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoints were late angiographic findings. Summary estimates were constructed using a random effects model. RESULTS: Six RCTs with 821 patients were included; 446 patients received a limus DCB, and 375 patients received a paclitaxel DCB. There was no difference between limus DCBs and paclitaxel DCBs in the incidence of TLR at a mean of 13.4 months (10.3% vs 7.8%; risk ratio [RR]: 1.32; 95% CI: 0.84-2.08). Subgroup analysis suggested no significant interaction among studies for de novo coronary lesions vs in-stent restenosis (Pinteraction = 0.58). There were no differences in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiac mortality, or target vessel myocardial infarction between groups. However, limus DCBs were associated with a higher risk of binary restenosis (RR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.14-3.12), late lumen loss (mean difference = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.03-0.28), and a smaller minimum lumen diameter (mean difference = -0.12; 95% CI: -0.22 to -0.02) at late follow-up. In addition, late lumen enlargement occurred more frequently (50% vs 27.5%; RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.45-0.77) with paclitaxel DCBs. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing DCB-only PCI, there were no differences in the risk of clinically driven TLR and other clinical outcomes between limus DCBs and paclitaxel DCBs. However, paclitaxel DCBs were associated with better late angiographic outcomes. These findings support the need for future trials to establish the role of new-generation limus DCBs for PCI.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Catéteres Cardíacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Paclitaxel , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/mortalidad , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Angiografía Coronaria , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty seems a safe and effective option for specific de novo coronary lesions. However, the beneficial effect of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided DCB angioplasty in de novo lesions remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the benefits of IVUS guidance over angiography guidance during DCB angioplasty in de novo coronary lesions. METHODS: A total of 260 patients with high bleeding risk who had a de novo coronary lesion (reference vessel diameter 2.0-4.0 mm, and lesion length ≤15 mm) were randomly assigned to either an IVUS-guided or an angioplasty-guided DCB angioplasty group. The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 7 months after procedure. The secondary endpoint was target vessel failure at 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 2 patients in the angiography-guided group and 7 patients in the IVUS-guided group underwent bailout stent implantation (P = 0.172). The primary endpoint of 7-month LLL was 0.03 ± 0.52 mm with angiography guidance vs -0.10 ± 0.34 mm with IVUS guidance (mean difference 0.14 mm; 95% CI: 0.02-0.26; P = 0.025). IVUS guidance was also associated with a larger 7-month minimal lumen diameter (2.06 ± 0.62 mm vs 1.75 ± 0.63 mm; P < 0.001) and a smaller diameter stenosis (28.15% ± 13.88% vs 35.83% ± 17.69%; P = 0.001) compared with angiography guidance. Five target vessel failures occurred at 6 months, with 4 (3.1%) in the angiography-guided group and 1 (0.8%) in the IVUS-guided group (P = 0.370). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that IVUS-guided DCB angioplasty is associated with a lower LLL in patients with a de novo coronary lesion compared with angiography guidance. (Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiography Guided Drug-Coated Balloon [ULTIMATE-III]; NCT04255043).
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Catéteres Cardíacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Angiografía Coronaria , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de Tiempo , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , ChinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) for the treatment of femoropopliteal (FP) lesions have not been systematically studied, but initial outcomes from early studies are promising. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the SELUTION SLR SCB, composed of proprietary microreservoir technology combining sirolimus and biodegradable polymer, when used to treat mild-to-moderate FP disease in a Japanese population. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, single-arm study (SELUTION SFA JAPAN) enrolled 134 patients with FP disease. It was independently adjudicated by an imaging core laboratory and clinical events committee. The primary endpoint was 12-month primary patency, defined as peak systolic velocity ratio ≥2.5 by duplex ultrasound and compared against a prespecified performance goal of 60% based on established angioplasty data. RESULTS: The mean age was 73.8 ± 6.9 years, and 60.3% of patients had diabetes mellitus. The mean lesion length was 127.4 ± 59.7 mm, 17.2% were chronic total occlusions, and 47.8% involved the popliteal artery. Data on 12-month restenosis were available in 127 patients (94.8%). The 12-month primary patency rate was 87.9%, and the freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) was 97.0% per Kaplan-Meier estimate. The major adverse event rate was 6.7%, driven by 4 CD-TLRs and 5 deaths, none of which were related to the device or procedure. Ankle-brachial index data improved significantly from 0.73 ± 0.16 at baseline to 0.96 ± 0.14 at 30 days postprocedure and was sustained through 12 months (0.94 ± 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: The SELUTION SFA JAPAN trial demonstrated that a novel SELUTION SCB is a safe and effective treatment option for FP disease in symptomatic patients.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia de Balón , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Arteria Femoral , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Arteria Poplítea , Sirolimus , Dispositivos de Acceso Vascular , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Humanos , Arteria Poplítea/fisiopatología , Arteria Poplítea/diagnóstico por imagen , Anciano , Masculino , Femenino , Arteria Femoral/fisiopatología , Arteria Femoral/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/terapia , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Prospectivos , Japón , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Angioplastia de Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia de Balón/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Recurrencia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Diseño de Equipo , Factores de Riesgo , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: With advancements in chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) recanalization techniques and concepts, the success rate of recanalization has been steadily increasing. However, the current data are too limited to draw any reliable conclusions about the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis to confirm the efficacy of DCB in CTO PCI. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science and Embase from inception to July 25, 2023. The primary outcome was major advent cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The follow-up angiographic endpoints were late lumen enlargement (LLE), reocclusion and restenosis. RESULTS: Five studies with a total of 511 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Across studies, patients were predominantly male (72.9-85.7%) and over fifty years old. The summary estimate rate of MACE was 13.0% (95% CI 10.1%-15.9%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.428). The summary estimate rates of cardiac death and MI were 2.2% (95% CI 0.7%-3.7%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.873) and 1.2% (95% CI -0.2-2.6%, I2 = 13.7%, p = 0.314), respectively. Finally, the pooled incidences of TLR and TVR were 10.1% (95% CI 5.7%-14.5%, I2 = 51.7%, p = 0.082) and 7.1% (95% CI 3.0%-11.2%, I2 = 57.6%, p = 0.070), respectively. Finally, the summary estimate rates of LLE, reocclusion and restenosis were 59.4% (95% CI 53.5-65.3%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.742), 3.3% (95% CI 1.1-5.4%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.865) and 17.5% (95% CI 12.9-22.0%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.623), respectively. CONCLUSION: Accordingly, DCB has the potential to be used as a treatment for CTO in suitable patients.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Catéteres Cardíacos , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Oclusión Coronaria , Humanos , Oclusión Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Oclusión Coronaria/mortalidad , Oclusión Coronaria/terapia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Enfermedad Crónica , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/mortalidad , Factores de Riesgo , Anciano , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Diseño de Equipo , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/mortalidadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with primary stenting, which stands for stent implantation regardless of obtaining satisfactory results with balloon angioplasty, has superseded conventional plain old balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting. With drug-coated balloon (DCB), primary DCB angioplasty with provisional stenting has shown non-inferiority to primary stenting for de novo coronary small vessel disease. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of such a strategy to the primary stenting on clinical endpoints in de novo lesions without vessel diameter restrictions remain uncertain. STUDY DESIGN: The REC-CAGEFREE I is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial aimed to enroll 2270 patients with acute or chronic coronary syndrome from 43 interventional cardiology centers in China to evaluate the non-inferiority of primary paclitaxel-coated balloons angioplasty to primary stenting for the treatment of de novo, non-complex lesions without vessel diameter restrictions. Patients who fulfill all the inclusion and exclusion criteria and have achieved a successful lesion pre-dilatation will be randomly assigned to the two arms in a 1:1 ratio. Protocol-guided DCB angioplasty and bailout stenting after unsatisfactory angioplasty are mandatory in the primary DCB angioplasty group. The second-generation sirolimus-eluting stent will be used as a bailout stent in the primary DCB angioplasty group and the treatment device in the primary stenting group. The primary endpoint is the incidence of Device-oriented Composite Endpoint (DoCE) within 24 months after randomization, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically and physiologically indicated target lesion revascularization. DISCUSSION: The ongoing REC-CAGEFREE I trial is the first randomized trial with a clinical endpoint to assess the efficacy and safety of primary DCB angioplasty for the treatment of de novo, non-complex lesions without vessel diameter restrictions. If non-inferiority is shown, PCI with primary DCB angioplasty could be an alternative treatment option to primary stenting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04561739).
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Catéteres Cardíacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Paclitaxel , Humanos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/mortalidad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , China , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Factores de Tiempo , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Stents , Anciano , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Estudios de Equivalencia como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Long-term follow-up results of various trials comparing Zotarolimus eluting stents (ZES) with Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been published recently. Additionally, over the last decade, there have been new trials comparing the ZES with various commercially available EES. We aim to conduct an updated meta-analysis in light of new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide comprehensive evidence regarding the temporal trends in the clinical outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. RCTs comparing ZES with EES for short (<2 years), intermediate (2-3 years), and long-term follow-ups (3-5 years) were included. Relative risk was used to pool the dichotomous outcomes using the random effects model employing the inverse variance method. All statistical analysis was conducted using Revman 5.4. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies reporting data at different follow-ups for nine trials (n = 14319) were included. At short-term follow-up (<2 years), there were no significant differences between the two types of stents (all-cause death, cardiac death, Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target vessel myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis or safety outcomes (target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, target lesion failure). At intermediate follow-up (2-3 years), EES was superior to ZES for reducing target lesion revascularization (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.05-1.58, p < 0.05). At long-term follow-up (3-5 years), there were no significant differences between the two groups for any of the pooled outcomes (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: ZES and EES have similar safety and efficacy at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-ups.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Everolimus , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sirolimus , Humanos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Everolimus/administración & dosificación , Everolimus/farmacología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Diseño de Prótesis , Factores de Riesgo , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/farmacología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoAsunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Humanos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Vasos Coronarios/diagnóstico por imagen , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Angiografía Coronaria , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Catéteres Cardíacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificaciónAsunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Serina-Treonina Quinasas TOR , Humanos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Serina-Treonina Quinasas TOR/antagonistas & inhibidores , Serina-Treonina Quinasas TOR/metabolismo , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Catéteres Cardíacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Diseño de Equipo , Factores de Riesgo , AnimalesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains challenging in current clinical practice. AIMS: The study was conducted to investigate a novel biolimus-coated balloon (BCB) for the treatment of coronary DES-ISR compared with the best-investigated paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB). METHODS: This was a prospective, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial comparing a novel BCB with a clinically proven PCB for coronary DES-ISR. The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 9 months assessed by an independent core laboratory. Baseline and follow-up optical coherence tomography were performed in a prespecified subgroup of patients. RESULTS: A total of 280 patients at 17 centres were randomised to treatment with a BCB (n=140) versus a PCB (n=140). At 9 months, LLL in the BCB group was 0.23±0.37 mm compared to 0.25±0.35 mm in the PCB group; the mean difference between the groups was -0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.12 to 0.07) mm; p-value for non-inferiority<0.0001. Similar clinical outcomes were also observed for both groups at 12 months. In the optical coherence tomography substudy, the neointimal area at 9 months was 2.32±1.04 mm2 in the BCB group compared to 2.37±0.93 mm2 in the PCB group; the mean difference between the groups was -0.09 (95% CI: -0.94 to 0.76) mm2; p=non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: This head-to-head comparison of a novel BCB shows similar angiographic outcomes in the treatment of coronary DES-ISR compared with a clinically proven PCB. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04733443).
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Reestenosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Paclitaxel , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Sirolimus , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/uso terapéutico , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/uso terapéutico , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/métodos , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Angiografía CoronariaRESUMEN
Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are specialized coronary devices comprised of a semicompliant balloon catheter with an engineered coating that allows the delivery of antiproliferative agents locally to the vessel wall during percutaneous coronary intervention. Although DCBs were initially developed more than a decade ago, their potential in coronary interventions has recently sparked renewed interest, especially in the United States. Originally designed to overcome the limitations of conventional balloon angioplasty and stenting, they aim to match or even improve upon the outcomes of drug-eluting stents without leaving a permanent implant. Presently, in-stent restenosis is the condition with the most robust evidence supporting the use of DCBs. DCBs provide improved long-term vessel patency compared with conventional balloon angioplasty and may be comparable to drug-eluting stents without the need for an additional stent layer, supporting their use as a first-line therapy for in-stent restenosis. Beyond the treatment of in-stent restenosis, DCBs provide an additional tool for de novo lesions for a strategy that avoids a permanent metal scaffold, which may be especially useful for the management of technically challenging anatomies such as small vessels and bifurcations. DCBs might also be advantageous for patients with high bleeding risk due to the decreased necessity for extended antiplatelet therapy, and in patients with diabetes and patients with diffuse disease to minimize long-stented segments. Further studies are crucial to confirm these broader applications for DCBs and to further validate safety and efficacy.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Catéteres Cardíacos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Diseño de Equipo , Factores de Riesgo , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Stents Liberadores de FármacosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of each third-generation drug-eluting stent with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology remain unclear. We investigated the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using the Coroflex ISAR polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) or Orsiro biodegradable polymer SES. METHODS: The HOST-IDEA trial (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Coronary Intervention With Next-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Platforms and Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), initially designed with a 2×2 factorial approach, sought to randomize patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention based on dual antiplatelet therapy duration (3 versus 12 months) and stent type (Coroflex ISAR versus Orsiro). Despite randomizing 2013 patients for dual antiplatelet therapy duration, the stent arm transitioned to a registry format during the trial. Among these, 328 individuals (16.3%) were randomized for Coroflex ISAR or Orsiro SES, while 1685 (83.7%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention without stent-type randomization. In this study, the Coroflex ISAR (n=559) and Orsiro groups (n=1449) were matched using a propensity score. The prespecified primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months. RESULTS: The baseline patient and procedural characteristics were well balanced between the Coroflex ISAR and Orsiro groups after propensity score matching (n=559, each group). The Coroflex ISAR group was significantly associated with a higher rate of target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, compared with the Orsiro group (3.4% versus 1.1%; hazard ratio, 3.21 [95% CI, 1.28-8.05]; P=0.01). A higher risk of target lesion failure in the Coroflex ISAR group was consistently observed across various subgroups. The rates of any bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.51-1.40]; P=0.52) and major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.61-4.08]; P=0.34) were comparable between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity score-matched analysis of the stent arm registry from the HOST-IDEA trial, the Orsiro SES was associated with significantly better outcomes in terms of 1-year target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, than the Coroflex ISAR SES. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02601157.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria , Polímeros , Diseño de Prótesis , Sistema de Registros , Sirolimus , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de Tiempo , Polímeros/química , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Factores de Riesgo , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/administración & dosificación , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Terapia Antiplaquetaria Doble , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Medición de Riesgo , Estenosis Coronaria/terapia , Estenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis Coronaria/mortalidad , Estudios Prospectivos , Infarto del Miocardio/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The BIONYX randomized trial is the first study to evaluate the Resolute Onyx durable polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in all-comers. Furthermore, it is the first trial to assess safety and efficacy of this stent versus the Orsiro biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in all-comers, paying particular attention to patients with diabetes. It has previously shown promising results until 3 years of follow-up. AIMS: We aimed to assess long-term clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with Onyx ZES versus Orsiro SES at 5-year follow-up. METHODS: The main composite endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF): cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Time to primary and secondary endpoints was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods, applying the log-rank test for between-group comparison. RESULTS: Follow-up was available in 2414/2488 (97.0%) patients. After 5 years, TVF showed no significant difference between Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES (12.7% vs. 13.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.75-1.17], plog-rank = 0.55). Landmark analysis between 3- and 5-year follow-up found a lower target lesion revascularization rate for Onyx ZES (1.1% vs. 2.4%, HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.24-0.93], plog-rank = 0.026). A prespecified subgroup analysis showed no significant between-stent difference in clinical outcome among patients with diabetes. After treatment with Onyx ZES, patients aged ≥75 years had significantly lower rates of TVF (13.8% vs. 21.9%, HR 0.60, 95% CI [0.39-0.93], plog-rank = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: The final 5-year analysis of the randomized BIONYX trial showed favorable and similar long-term outcomes of safety and efficacy for Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES in both all-comers and patients with diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Diseño de Prótesis , Sirolimus , Humanos , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Masculino , Femenino , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano , Factores de Tiempo , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Riesgo , Catéteres Cardíacos , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Limited comparative data exist on different interventional strategies for endovascular revascularization of complex femoropopliteal interventions. OBJECTIVES: In this study, the authors aimed to compare a stent-avoiding (SA) vs a stent-preferred (SP) strategy, promoting optimal lesion preparation and the use of drug-eluting technologies in both arms. METHODS: Within a prospective, multicenter, pilot study, 120 patients with symptomatic complex femoropopliteal lesions (Rutherford classification 2-4, mean lesion length 187.7 ± 78.3 mm, 79.2% total occlusions) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 fashion to endovascular treatment with either paclitaxel-coated balloons or polymer-coated, paclitaxel-eluting stents. Lesion preparation including the use of devices for plaque modification and/or removal was at the operators' discretion in both treatment arms. RESULTS: In the SA group, lesion preparation was more frequently performed (71.7% SA [43/60] vs 51.7% [31/60] SP; P = 0.038) with a high provisional stenting rate (48.3% [29/60]). At the 12-month follow-up, primary patency was 78.2% (43/55) in the SA group and 78.6% (44/56) in the SP group (P = 1.0; relative risk: 0.995; 95% CI: 0.818-1.210). Freedom from major adverse events was determined in 93.1% (54/58) in the SA group and in 94.9% (56/59) in the SP group (P = 0.717; relative risk: 0.981; 95% CI: 0.895-1.075), with all adverse events attributable to clinically driven target lesion revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Both endovascular strategies promoting lesion preparation before the use of drug-eluting devices suggest promising efficacy and safety results in complex femoropopliteal procedures with a high proportion of total occlusions through 12 months. Ongoing follow-up will show whether different results emerge over time. (Best Endovascular Strategy for Complex Lesions of the Superficial Femoral Artery [BEST-SFA]; NCT03776799).
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Arteria Femoral , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Arteria Poplítea , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Angioplastia de Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia de Balón/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Arteria Femoral/diagnóstico por imagen , Arteria Femoral/fisiopatología , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/terapia , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Proyectos Piloto , Arteria Poplítea/diagnóstico por imagen , Arteria Poplítea/fisiopatología , Estudios Prospectivos , Diseño de Prótesis , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Dispositivos de Acceso Vascular , Grado de Desobstrucción VascularRESUMEN
For patients with Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia (CLTI), endovascular approaches to revascularization are often employed as a component of multimodality care aimed at limb preservation. However, patients with CLTI are also prone to treatment failure, particularly following balloon angioplasty alone. Drug-coated devices utilizing Paclitaxel were developed to decrease restenosis but have been primarily studied in patients presenting with claudication. In recent years, data have emerged which describe the efficacy of drug-coated devices in the treatment of patients with CLTI. Concurrently, there has been major controversy surrounding the use of drug-coated devices in peripheral arterial disease. A historical narrative of the development and use of drug-coated devices for peripheral arterial disease is presented, along with discussion of major trials. Evidence argues that paclitaxel-based therapies for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) do not increase mortality risk compared to nondrug-coated devices. In CLTI patients, paclitaxel-based balloons and stents provide superior patency and freedom reintervention compared to nondrug-coated devices when treating femoropopliteal disease. However, the use of Paclitaxel-based therapies for below-the-knee (BTK) interventions has not been shown to provide clinically meaningful outcomes compared to nondrug-based therapies. Newer generation antiproliferative agents (Sirolimus, Everolimus) and delivery systems (bioabsorbable scaffolds) hold promise for BTK interventions with early data suggesting decreased rates of major amputation or major adverse limb events.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Isquemia Crónica que Amenaza las Extremidades , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Humanos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/terapia , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Factores de Riesgo , Recuperación del Miembro , Angioplastia de Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia de Balón/efectos adversos , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/efectos adversos , Dispositivos de Acceso Vascular , Diseño de Prótesis , Difusión de Innovaciones , Isquemia/terapia , Isquemia/fisiopatología , Isquemia/mortalidad , Historia del Siglo XXI , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) is a potential treatment option for peripheral arterial disease (PAD). There are currently no long-term clinical data for this novel treatment for PAD. We present the 3-year results of the first-in-human study of MagicTouch PTA SCB for treatment of PAD for both femoropopliteal and below-the-knee arteries. METHODS: The XTOSI pilot study is a prospective, single-arm, open-label, single-center trial evaluating MagicTouch PTA SCB for symptomatic PAD. Assessments through 3 years included freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), freedom from major amputation, amputation-free survival (AFS), overall survival, and ulcer-free status. RESULTS: At 3 years, the overall freedom from CD-TLR was 84.4%, freedom from major amputation was 86.1%, AFS was 63.3%, overall survival was 63.3%, and ulcer-free status in remaining survivors with intact limbs was 100%. For femoropopliteal lesions, at 3 years, the freedom from CD-TLR was 92.9%, freedom from major amputation was 93.3%, AFS was 70%, and overall survival was 70%. For below-the-knee lesions, at 3 years, the freedom from CD-TLR was 77.8%, freedom from major amputation was 81.0%, AFS was 58.6%, and overall survival was 58.6%. CONCLUSIONS: SCB in the XTOSI pilot study showed promising clinical results sustained to 3 years, and no long-term safety concerns were raised. Randomized trials are currently ongoing to investigate the safety and efficacy of SCB for treatment of PAD.