Drug-Eluting Balloons in the Treatment of Coronary De Novo Lesions: A Comprehensive Review

Rationale and design of the prevail global trial program evaluating the prevail drug-coated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis and de novo small vessel disease

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the leading cause of treatment failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Especially in small caliber coronary arteries, restenosis is common following PCI and represents a treatment challenge. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) are an attractive alternative to stents for treatment of both ISR and small vessel disease. The safety and efficacy of the Prevail DCB will be assessed for (1) the treatment of ISR and (2) de novo lesions in small vessels.

TRIAL DESIGN

Prevail Global is a prospective, international, dual cohort clinical study enrolling (1) patients undergoing PCI for ISR in a randomized controlled trial (1:1) design comparing the Prevail DCB versus an FDA-approved DCB (AgentTM, Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick MA), and (2) patients with de novo small vessel disease undergoing PCI with the Prevail DCB as part of a single-arm study compared with a historical control. The primary endpoint is target lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months post procedure. Patient follow-up is planned for 1 month, 6 months, and yearly through 5 years. Enrollment is expected to start in early 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prevail Global study will directly assess the safety and efficacy of the Prevail DCB for the treatment of ISR and de novo small vessel lesions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prevail Global, NCT06535854, is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06535854.

Drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in patients with in-stent restenosis: An updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have promising results in the management of in-stent restenosis (ISR), still their role remains a major challenge, and not well established in contemporary clinical practice.

AIMS

To provide a comprehensive appraisal of the efficacy and safety of DCBs in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, web of Science, Ovid, and Cochrane Central from inception until 30 March, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DCB versus DES in ISR patients. Our primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and late lumen loss (LLL). Secondary clinical endpoints were all-cause death, cardiac death, MI, TLR, TVR, and stent thrombosis, and angiographic outcomes were MLD, and in-stent binary restenosis.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs comprising 1977 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of MACE was 15.57% in the DCB group compared to 14.13% in the DES group, with no significant difference in the risk of MACE following DCB (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87 to 1.44). Compared with the DES intervention, the risk of LLL was comparable to the DCB intervention (mean difference [MD] -0.08, 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.02), while the incidence of TLR was increased in the DCB intervention (OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.2 to 1.99).

CONCLUSION

DCB was comparable to DES implantation is ISR patients regarding clinical outcomes, however it showed an increase in TLR events. Moreover, a RCT with large sample size and longer follow-up duration is warrened to validate these results.

Light-driven micro/nanomotors in biomedical applications

Nanotechnology brings hope for targeted drug delivery. However, most current drug delivery systems use passive delivery strategies with limited therapeutic efficiency. Over the past two decades, research on micro/nanomotors (MNMs) has flourished in the biomedical field. Compared with other driven methods, light-driven MNMs have the advantages of being reversible, simple to control, clean, and efficient. Under light irradiation, the MNMs can overcome several barriers in the body and show great potential in the treatment of various diseases, such as tumors, and gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Herein, the classification and mechanism of light-driven MNMs are introduced briefly. Subsequently, the applications of light-driven MNMs in overcoming physiological and pathological barriers in the past five years are highlighted. Finally, the future prospects and challenges of light-driven MNMs are discussed as well. This review will provide inspiration and direction for light-driven MNMs to overcome biological barriers in vivo and promote the clinical application of light-driven MNMs in the biomedical field.

Drug-coated balloon: an effective alternative to stent strategy in small-vessel coronary artery disease-a meta-analysis

Background

Small-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently observed in coronary angiography and linked to a higher risk of lesion failure and restenosis. Currently, treatment of small vessels is not standardized while having drug-eluting stents (DES) or drug-coated balloons (DCBs) as possible strategies. We aimed to conduct a meta-analytic approach to assess the effectiveness of treatment strategies and outcomes for small-vessel CAD.

Methods

Comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies reporting treatment strategies of small-vessel CAD with a reference diameter of ≤3.0 mm. Target lesion revascularization (TLR), target lesion thrombosis, all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as clinical outcomes. Outcomes from single-arm and randomized studies based on measures by means of their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were compared using a meta-analytic approach. Statistical significance was assumed if CIs did not overlap.

Results

Thirty-seven eligible studies with a total of 31,835 patients with small-vessel CAD were included in the present analysis. Among those, 28,147 patients were treated with DES (24 studies) and 3,299 patients with DCB (18 studies). Common baseline characteristics were equally distributed in the different studies. TLR rate was 4% in both treatment strategies [0.04; 95% CI 0.03-0.05 (DES) vs. 0.03-0.07 (DCB)]. MI occurred in 3% of patients receiving DES and in 2% treated with DCB [0.03 (0.02-0.04) vs. 0.02 (0.01-0.03)]. All-cause mortality was 3% in the DES group [0.03 (0.02-0.05)] compared with 1% in the DCB group [0.01 (0.00-0.03)]. Approximately 9% of patients with DES developed MACE vs. 4% of patients with DCB [0.09 (0.07-0.10) vs. 0.04 (0.02-0.08)]. Meta-regression analysis did not show a significant impact of reference vessel diameter on outcomes.

Conclusion

This large meta-analytic approach demonstrates similar clinical and angiographic results between treatment strategies with DES and DCB in small-vessel CAD. Therefore, DES may be waived in small coronary arteries when PCI is performed with DCB.

Feasibility and Safety of Drug-Coated Balloon-Only Angioplasty for De Novo Ostial Lesions of the Left Anterior Descending Artery: Two-Center Retrospective Study

Introduction

There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty in the percutaneous treatment of complex de novo ostial coronary lesions. This study primarily aimed to explore the feasibility and safety of this innovative approach for ostial lesions in the left anterior descending artery (LAD).

Methods

Patients treated with paclitaxel DCB or second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) were retrospectively enrolled from two large centers. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization, and recurrent myocardial infarction related to target artery occlusion. Cox regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for MACE, and propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias.

Results

A total of 388 patients were included; among them, 52 were treated with paclitaxel DCB, and 336 with DES for ostial LAD lesions. Using propensity score matching, 49 patients were treated with DCB-only and 49 with the DES strategy. The average follow-up time was 12 months; subsequently, a non-significant decrease in MACE rate was observed in the DCB-only angioplasty treatment group (MACE: 6 vs. 6%, p = 1.0; TLR: 2 vs. 4%, p = 0.56). Cox regression analysis indicated that DCB-only angioplasty was not an independent risk factor for adverse events after adjusting for confounding risk factors (hazard ratio: 1.713, p = 0.43).

Conclusion

The use of the DCB-only approach is an innovative and optional strategy in the treatment of isolated ostial LAD disease. A further randomized trial is of necessity to confirm the feasibility and safety of drug-coated balloon-only angioplasty for LAD de novo ostial lesions.

Wellens’ syndrome: incidence, characteristics, and long-term clinical outcomes

Background

Few studies with large sample sizes are available regarding patients with Wellens’ syndrome. Therefore, we sought to assess the current incidence, risk factors, clinical presentation and long-term outcomes of this population.

Methods

Among a total of 3528 patients with ACS who underwent angioplasty from 2017 to 2019 in our centre, 2127 NSTE-ACS patients with culprit LAD vessels were enrolled in this study. According to electrocardiographic criteria, the patients were divided into a Wellens’ group (n = 200) and non-Wellens’ group (n = 1927). The primary endpoint was cardiac death; the secondary endpoint was MACCE, a composite of all-cause death, cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, heart failure and stroke.

Results

The incidence of Wellens’ syndrome was 5.7% (200 of 3528) of all ACS patients. Wellens’ syndrome more often manifested as NSTEMI (69% vs. 17.5%, P < 0.001). The percentages of preexisting coronary heart disease (39.6% vs. 23%) and previous PCI (19.5% vs. 9%) were significantly higher in the non-Wellens’ group than in the Wellens’ group (all P < 0.001). More importantly, the proportion of early PCI was higher in the Wellens’ group (68% vs. 59.3%, P = 0.017). At a median follow-up of 24 months, Wellens’ syndrome was not associated with an increased risk of MACCE (P = 0.05) or cardiac death (P = 0.188).

Conclusions

The presence of Wellens’ syndrome is not definitively associated with adverse prognosis in patients with NSTE-ACS. Age ≥ 65 years, diabetes, NSTEMI, eGFR < 60 ml/min and left main disease are associated with the incidence of cardiac death. Early recognition and aggressive intervention are critical, as they may help to attenuate adverse outcomes.

In-Stent Restenosis and a Drug-Coated Balloon: Insights from a Clinical Therapeutic Strategy on Coronary Artery Diseases

Coronary heart disease is a major cause of death and disability in developed countries. Stent implantation has become an efficacious treatment for a culprit lesion vessel of the coronary artery. However, 10%-20% restenosis is still an important complication that restricts the clinical safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents. In-stent restenosis may lead to the recurrence of major cardiovascular adverse events, including angina pectoris, acute myocardial infarction, and even sudden cardiac death. These events are currently serious problems that occur after coronary stent implantation. Clinical physicians face a difficult choice for in-stent restenosis treatment. Recent studies indicate that a drug-coated balloon has promising clinical efficacy similar to the drug-eluting stents for treating coronary in-stent restenosis. Therefore, in this study, we highlight the progress of coronary intervention and the use of drug-coated balloons in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR).

Small vessel coronary artery disease: How small can we go with myocardial revascularization?

The issue of small coronary artery atherosclerosis represents an intriguing aspect of coronary artery disease, which is related with higher rates of peri- and post-procedural complications and impaired long-term outcome. This problem is further complicated by the unclear definition of small coronary vessel. Recent randomized controlled trials have provided new data on possible novel interventional treatment of small coronary vessels with drug-coated balloons instead of traditional new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation. Also, the conservative management represents a therapeutic option in light of the results of the recent ISCHEMIA trial. The current article provides an overview of the most appropriate definition, interventional management, and prognosis of small coronary artery atherosclerosis.

Efficacy of drug-coated balloon angioplasty after directional coronary atherectomy for coronary bifurcation lesions (DCA/DCB registry)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of additional drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty after directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) for coronary bifurcation lesions.

BACKGROUND

The optimal therapy for bifurcation lesions has not been established, even in the drug-eluting stent era. DCA possibly prevents plaque and carina shift in bifurcation lesions by plaque debulking; however, the efficacy of combined DCA and DCB (DCA/DCB) for bifurcation lesions remains unclear.

METHODS

This multicenter registry retrospectively recruited patients with bifurcation lesions who underwent DCA/DCB and follow-up angiogram at 6-15 months. The primary endpoint was the 12-month target vessel failure (TVF) rate. The secondary endpoints were procedure-related major complications, major cardiovascular events at 12 months, restenosis at 12 months, target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months, and target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 12 months.

RESULTS

We enrolled 129 patients from 16 Japanese centers. One hundred and four lesions (80.6%) were located around the left main trunk bifurcations. No side branch compromise was found intraoperatively. Restenosis was observed in three patients (2.3%) at 12 months. TLR occurred in four patients (3.1%): 3 (2.3%) in the main vessel and 1 (0.8%) in the ostium of the side branch at 12 months. TVF incidence at 12 months was slightly higher in 14 patients (10.9%), and only two patients (1.6%) had symptomatic TVR. One patient (0.8%) had non-target vessel-related myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggested that DCA/DCB provided good clinical outcomes and minimal side branch damage and could be an optimal non-stent percutaneous coronary intervention strategy for bifurcation lesions.

Drug-Coated balloons vs drug-eluting stents for the treatment of small coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence about the effects of drug-coated balloons (DCB) compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with native small vessel coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and main international conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing DCB versus DES in patients with native small vessel CAD. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was target vessel revascularization (TVR). Secondary clinical endpoints were: myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), all-cause death, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis or target vessel thrombosis. Secondary angiographic outcomes were: in-segment restenosis, in-segment percentage-diameter stenosis, in-segment late lumen loss, in-segment net luminal gain, and in-segment minimal lumen diameter.

RESULTS

Five trials enrolling 1,459 patients were included. Mean clinical follow-up was 10.2 months. The use of DCB, compared with DES, was associated with similar risk of TVR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 1.68; p = .92), TLR (OR: 1.74; 95% CI: 0.57 to 5.28; p = .33), all-cause death (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.14 to 7.48; p = .98), with a trend toward a lower risk of MI (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.23 to 1.03; p = .06), and with significant lower risk of vessel thrombosis (OR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.94; p = .04). DCB use was associated with similar risk of angiographic restenosis (OR: 1.12; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.84; p = .64), comparable late luminal loss (standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.18; 95% CI: -0.39 to 0.03; p = .09), while leading to significant higher percentage diameter stenosis (SMD: 0.27; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.41; p < .01) and smaller minimal luminal diameter (SMD: -0.52; 95% CI: -0.86 to -0.18; p = .003).

CONCLUSION

Compared with DES, the use of DCB for the treatment of native small vessel CAD is associated with similar TVR and restenosis and reduces the risk of vessel thrombosis, although DES implantation yields slightly better angiographic surrogate endpoints.

Histopathologic and physiologic effect of bifurcation stenting: current status and future prospects

Introduction: Coronary bifurcation lesions are involved in up to 20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However, bifurcation lesion intervention is associated with a high complication rate, and optimal treatment of coronary bifurcation is an ongoing debate.Areas covered: Both different stenting techniques and a variety of devices have been suggested for bifurcation treatment, including the use of conventional coronary stents, bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS), drug-eluting balloons (DEB), and stents dedicated to bifurcations. This review will summarize different therapeutic approaches with their advantages and shortcomings, with special emphasis on histopathologic and physiologic effects of each treatment strategy.Expert opinion: Histopathology and clinical data have shown that a more simple treatment strategy is beneficial in bifurcation lesions, achieving superior results. Bifurcation interventions through balloon angioplasty or placement of stents can importantly alter the bifurcation's geometry and accordingly modify local flow conditions. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) studies have shown that the outcome of bifurcation interventions is governed by local hemodynamic shear conditions. Minimizing detrimental flow conditions as much as possible should be the ultimate strategy to achieve long-term success of bifurcation interventions.

Platelet-derived nanomotor coated balloon for atherosclerosis combination therapy

A nanorobot is used to realize deep penetration of drugs in atherosclerotic plaque, photothermal ablation of inflammatory macrophages and long-term anti-proliferation effects.

Drug-coated balloons for coronary artery disease: current concepts and controversies

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are a novel development for percutaneous coronary intervention. The first successful application was in-stent restenosis but in recent years, strong evidence has been released for its use in native small-vessels disease. Additional applications such as acute myocardial infarction, chronic total occlusion and bifurcation lesions are still under investigation. This article reviews the key studies evaluating the role of DCBs in several settings and reports on interesting cases where DCBs showed positive results for high-risk patients with neoplasm, as well as with high bleeding risk, planned surgery or renal injury. We also highlight a new biodegradable therapy for coronary bifurcation treatment, in which a bioresorbable vascular scaffold is implanted in the main branch, completed with a DCB angioplasty in the side branch when a treatment is deemed necessary.

Drug-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent in de novo small coronary vessel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon as a novel therapeutic strategy has been used to treat restenosis in cases of bare metal and drug-eluting stents. However, evidence of its safety and efficacy is scarce in de novo small coronary artery vessel disease. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of the drug-coated balloon and the drug-eluting stent.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases were searched for studies published up to October 17, 2018. Studies comparing the drug-coated balloon with the drug-eluting stent strategy in patients with de novo small coronary artery vessel disease (reference diameter, <3 mm) were identified. The clinical outcomes were nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiac death, all-cause death, target lesion revascularization, and target-vessel revascularization. Data were analyzed using the statistical software RevMan (version 5.3). Fixed effects models were performed to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Sensitivity analyses were used to detect potential sources of heterogeneity, while subgroup analyses were implemented to assess the differential effects.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials and 3 nonrandomized controlled studies were identified. Six studies including a total of 1800 patients compared the differences between the drug-coated balloon and the drug-eluting stent strategies in patients with de novo small coronary artery vessel disease. The results indicated that the drug-coated balloon strategy was associated with a significant reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90, P = .02) compared with the drug-eluting stent strategy, while insignificant inter-strategy differences were observed in cardiac death (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73-3.33, P = .25), all-cause death (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25-1.23, P = .15), target lesion revascularization (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73-2.1, P = .43), and target-vessel revascularization (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59-1.52, P = .84).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that the drug-coated balloon strategy is noninferior to the drug-eluting stent strategy, delivering a good outcome in nonfatal myocardial infarction, and can be recommended as an optimal treatment strategy in patients with de novo small coronary artery vessel disease. Larger randomized controlled studies with longer follow-up periods are needed to further confirm the benefits of the drug-coated balloon strategy.

Role of Drug-coated Balloons in Small-vessel Coronary Artery Disease

Percutaneous coronary intervention of small-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) remains challenging due to difficulties with device delivery and high restenosis rate, even with the use of newer-generation drug-eluting stents. Drug-coated balloons represent an attractive emerging percutaneous coronary intervention option in patients with SVD. Potential advantages of drug-coated balloons in SVD include enhanced deliverability because of their small profile, avoidance of foreign-body implantation, and shorter duration of dual antiplatelet therapy.

Short-term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with directional coronary atherectomy followed by drug-coated balloon: a preliminary report

Directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) is a unique technique used in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which involves the removal of plaque from the coronary artery. Treatment with a drug-coated balloon (DCB) appears to be effective, especially when a predilatation of the lesion is performed appropriately. We hypothesize that the combination therapy of DCA with DCB is an effective strategy in PCI. PCI with DCA followed by DCB was performed for 23 patients from December 2014 to April 2017. All DCA procedures were performed under the guidance of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) findings and all procedures were successfully performed without incurring major complications such as a coronary perforation. Plaque area (PA) was reduced from 77.3 ± 10.4% at baseline to 50.9 ± 9.2% after DCA and luminal cross-sectional area (CSA) after PCI was enlarged from 3.6 ± 1.8 to 9.3 ± 3.3 mm². Follow-up coronary angiography (CAG) performed at 6–10 months showed no cases having incurred restenosis. Plaque area at follow-up CAG was 52.0 ± 8.5% and luminal CSA was 9.5 ± 2.1 mm². There were no cases undergoing target vessel revascularization (TVR) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) during the follow-up periods. PCI with DCA followed by DCB might be an effective strategy for de novo lesions.

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.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Elderly: Are Drug-coated Balloons the Future?

Background:

Balloon angioplasty revolutionised percutaneous treatment for coronary ar-tery disease four decades ago, but vessel-threatening dissections, elastic recoil and restenosis were major drawbacks to an otherwise successful long-lasting intervention. Subsequent advances with bare metal stents and then drug eluting stents followed, aiming to mitigate the risks of acute vessel closure and restenosis. However, stent implantation often necessitates dual antiplatelet therapy for a pro-longed period of time, which in itself can lead to adverse outcomes, especially in the frail elderly pop-ulation at higher risk of bleeding. More recently, bioabsorbable stents have been implemented in clini-cal practice enabling earlier intimal coverage of the stent and apposition.

However, another addition to the armamentarium of percutaneous coronary intervention is the use of drug-coated balloons without the need for deploying any coronary stents or scaffolds. Drug-coated balloons are semi-compliant balloons coated with an antiproliferative agent that is rapidly released on contact with the vessel intima exerting an anti-restenotic effect. The absence of a metallic scaffold means that the need for antiplatelet therapy can potentially be negated in the longer term if required. In this article, we will review the history of percutaneous coronary intervention and the available evi-dence for the appropriate use of drug-coated balloons especially in the elderly population.

Conclusion:

We will conclude this review by demonstrating the potential use of drug-coated balloon rather percutaneous stenting through case examples.

Comparison of clinical outcomes after drug-eluting balloon and drug-eluting stent use for in-stent restenosis related acute myocardial infarction: a retrospective study

Background

Good results of drug-eluting balloon (DEB) use are achieved in in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions, small vessel disease, long lesions, and bifurcations. However, few reports exist about DEB use in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with ISR. This study’s aim was to evaluate the efficacy of DEB for AMI with ISR.

Methods

Between November 2011 and December 2015, 117 consecutive patients experienced AMI including ST-segment elevation MI, and non-ST-segment elevation MI due to ISR, and received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We divided our patients into two groups: (1) PCI with further DEB, and (2) PCI with further drug-eluting stent (DES). Clinical outcomes such as target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, recurrent MI, stroke, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality were analyzed.

Results

The patients’ average age was 68.37 ± 11.41 years; 69.2% were male. A total of 75 patients were enrolled in the DEB group, and 42 patients were enrolled in the DES group. The baseline characteristics between the two groups were the same without statistical differences except for gender. Peak levels of cardiac biomarker, pre- and post-PCI cardiac function were similar between two groups. The major adverse cardiac cerebral events rate (34.0% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.688) and cardiovascular mortality rate (11.7% vs. 12.8%; p = 1.000) were similar in both groups.

Conclusions

DEB is a reasonable strategy for AMI with ISR. Compared with DES, DEB is an alternative strategy which yielded acceptable short-term outcomes and similar 1-year clinical outcomes.

Comparison of drug-eluting balloon versus drug-eluting stent for treatment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Drug-eluting balloons (DEB) have significant value for treating coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the merits of using DEB versus drug-eluting stents (DES) to treat CAD remain controversial. Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of DEB and DES for treatment of CAD.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases for eligible trials comparing DEB with DES for treatment of CAD. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE); the secondary endpoints included in-lesion late lumen loss (LLL), binary restenosis (BR), myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR) and mortality.

Results

Twenty-three trials with a total of 2712 patients were included. There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint of MACE between the DEB and DES groups (Risk Ratio (RR) 1.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.87, 1.63); P = 0.27), or in the clinical outcomes of each of MACE’s components, including TLR, MI and mortality. However, efficacy was significantly different between the DEB and DES groups, especially when we compared DEB to second-generation DES: in-lesion LLL (Mean Difference (MD) 0.11; (0.01, 0.22); P = 0.03); binary restenosis (RR 1.46; (1.00, 2.13); P = 0.05).

Conclusions

DEB is equivalent to DES in terms of safety for managing CAD, and DEB may be considered as an alternative choice for treatment of CAD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-018-0771-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Treatment of de novo coronary artery bifurcation lesions with drug coated balloons: A reappraisal according to the available scientific data

The treatment of coronary artery bifurcation often represents a challenge for interventional cardiologist. Although several stenting techniques are available for the treatment of de novo coronary bifurcation lesions, over the last years, different studies have proposed and analysed the use of drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the treatment of coronary artery bifurcation lesions as an alternative treatment. To date, even considering those studies which have analysed a combined strategy (DCB+stenting) or a DCB-only approach, the evidences are scant and the results debatable. We review the available scientific data regarding the use of DCB in the treatment of naive coronary bifurcation lesions.

A Randomized Comparison of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Any In-Stent Restenosis: The DARE Trial

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to evaluate the relative performance of a drug-eluting balloon (DEB) and a drug-eluting stent (DES) in patients with any (bare-metal or drug-eluting stent) in-stent restenosis (ISR).

BACKGROUND

The treatment of ISR remains challenging in contemporary clinical practice.

METHODS

In a multicenter randomized noninferiority trial, patients with any ISR were randomly allocated in a 1:1 fashion to treatment with a DEB (SeQuent Please paclitaxel-eluting balloon, B. Braun Melsungen, Melsungen, Germany), or a DES (XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California). The primary endpoint was noninferiority in terms of in-segment minimal lumen diameter (MLD) at 6-month angiographic follow-up. Secondary endpoints included angiographic parameters at 6 months and clinical follow-up up to 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 278 patients, of whom 56% had DES-ISR, were randomized at 8 sites to treatment with DEB (n = 141) or DES (n = 137). As compared with DEB, DES was associated with larger MLD and lower % stenosis immediately post-procedure (1.84 ± 0.46 vs. 1.72 ± 0.35; p = 0.018; and 26 ± 10% vs. 30 ± 10%; p = 0.03). Angiographic follow up was completed at 196 ± 53 days in 79% of patients. With respect to the primary endpoint of in-segment MLD at 6 months, DEB was noninferior to DES (DEB 1.71 ± 0.51 mm vs. DES 1.74 ± 0.61 mm; p for noninferiority <0.0001). Target vessel revascularization at 12-month follow-up was similar in both groups (DES 7.1% vs. DEB 8.8%; p = 0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ISR, treatment with DEB was noninferior compared with DES in terms of 6-month MLD. There were no differences in clinical endpoints, including target vessel revascularization up to 12 months. Therefore, use of a DEB is an attractive treatment option for in-stent restenosis, withholding the need for additional stent implantation.

Basic Concepts and Clinical Outcomes of Drug-Eluting Balloons for Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease: An Overview

The technology of percutaneous coronary intervention for atherosclerotic coronary artery disease has evolved considerably since its inception. Though Drug-Eluting Stent (DES) reduces the rate of restenosis, long-term safety outcomes and persistent restenosis in complex lesion subset remain area of concern. Recently, Drug-Eluting Balloon (DEB) represents a novel treatment strategy for atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. DEB demonstrated its added value in preclinical studies. Inspired by these results, several clinical trials particularly in complex lesion subsets have been started to explore the value of this novel treatment strategy in a broader range of lesions. This review would summarise material compositions and different characteristics and clinical outcomes of currently available DEB.