Neointimal Modification With Scoring Balloon and Efficacy of Drug-Coated Balloon Therapy in Patients With Restenosis in Drug-Eluting Coronary Stents: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Excimer laser coronary angioplasty combined with drug-coated balloon in the treatment of in-stent restenosis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to investigate the safety and efficacy of excimer laser coronary angioplasty (ELCA) combined with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR), and to explore whether the contrast injection technique would improve the neointimal tissue ablation of ELCA.

METHODS

We studied patients diagnosed with ISR between January 2019 and October 2022 at two medical centers. These patients underwent DCB angioplasty guided by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Based on whether ELCA was performed before DCB treatment, patients were categorized into two groups: the ELCA + DCB group and the DCB group. All patients underwent clinical follow-up 1 year after the procedure. The primary endpoint was the 1-year rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR), which was defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or bypass surgery on the target vessel conducted to address restenosis or other complications related to the target lesion. The secondary endpoints including immediate luminal gain (ΔMLA, defined as the difference in minimum lumen area before and after the intervention).

RESULTS

A total of 85 lesions in 75 patients were included. The mean age of the study population was 64.2 ± 12.0 years, with 81.3% male. Baseline clinical characteristics were well-balanced, and procedural success was 100% in both groups. The ELCA + DCB group (n = 24) exhibited a greater ΔMLA compared to the DCB group (n = 61) (3.57 ± 0.79 mm² vs. 2.50 ± 1.06 mm², [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.57-1.69], p < 0.001), The reduction in 1-year TLR was more frequently observed in patients from the ELCA + DCB group compared to the DCB group (hazard ratio 0.33 [95% CI: 0.11-0.99]; log-rank p = 0.048). The exploratory analysis showed that ELCA with contrast infusion is associated with greater acute lumen gain compared to ELCA with saline infusion (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ELCA and DCB is a safe and effective treatment strategy for in-stent stenosis. Additionally, compared with saline injection, ELCA with contrast injection is associated with greater acute lumen gain. However, the optimal contrast agent concentration and long-term outcome of the contrast injection technique need confirmation through larger sample sizes and prospective studies.

Current Management of In-Stent Restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the primary cause of target lesion failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), resulting in 10-year incidences of target lesion revascularization at a rate of approximately 20%. The treatment of ISR is challenging due to its inherent propensity for recurrence and varying susceptibility to available strategies, influenced by a complex interplay between clinical and lesion-specific conditions. Given the multiple mechanisms contributing to the development of ISR, proper identification of the underlying substrate, especially by using intravascular imaging, becomes pivotal as it can indicate distinct therapeutic requirements. Among standalone treatments, drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been the most effective. The main advantage of a DCB-based approach is the avoidance of an additional metallic layer, which may otherwise enhance neointimal hyperplasia, provide the substratum for developing neoatherosclerosis, and expose the patient to a persistently higher risk of coronary ischemic events. On the other hand, target vessel scaffolding by DES implantation confers relevant mechanical advantages over DCB angioplasty, generally resulting in larger luminal gain, while drug elution from the stent surface ensures the inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. Nevertheless, repeat stenting with DES also implies an additional permanent metallic layer that may reiterate and promote the mechanisms leading to ISR. Against this background, the selection of either DCB or DES on a patient- and lesion-specific basis as well as the implementation of adjuvant treatments, including cutting/scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy, and rotational atherectomy, hold the potential to improve the effectiveness of ISR treatment over time. In this review, we comprehensively assessed the available evidence from randomized trials to define contemporary interventional treatment of ISR and provide insights for future directions.

Comparative efficacy of interventional therapies and devices for coronary in-stent restenosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

In-stent restenosis (ISR) has become a significant obstacle to interventional therapy for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for patients with coronary ISR remains controversial. This network meta-analysis (NMA) was aimed to compare and estimate the effectiveness of different PCI strategies and commercial devices for the treatment of patients with coronary ISR.

Methods

In present study, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from database inception to October 20, 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials. We included studies comparing various PCI strategies for the treatment of any type of coronary ISR. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42022364308.

Results

We included 44 eligible trials including 8479 patients, 39 trials comparing the treatment effects of 10 PCIs, and 5 trials comparing the efficacy between different types of drug-eluting stent (DES) or drug-coated balloon (DCB) devices. Among the PCIs, everolimus-eluting stent was the optimal strategy considering target lesion revascularization (TLR), percent diameter stenosis (%DS), and binary restenosis (BR), and sirolimus-coated balloon was the optimal strategy considering late lumen loss (LLL). In the comparison of commercial devices, the combination strategy excimer laser coronary angioplasty plus SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon showed promising therapeutic prospects.

Conclusions

DCB and DES remain the preferred treatment strategies for coronary ISR, considering both the primary clinical outcome (TLR) and the angiographic outcomes (LLL, BR, %DS). Personalized combination interventions including DCB or DES hold promise as a novel potential treatment pattern for coronary ISR.

In-Stent Restenosis Overview: From Intravascular Imaging to Optimal Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Management

Despite ongoing progress in stent technology and deployment techniques, in-stent restenosis (ISR) still remains a major issue following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and accounts for 10.6% of all interventions in the United States. With the continuous rise in ISR risk factors such as obesity and diabetes, along with an increase in the treatment of complex lesions with high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (CHIP), a substantial growth in ISR burden is expected. This review aims to provide insight into the mechanisms, classification, and management of ISR, with a focus on exploring innovative approaches to tackle this complication comprehensively, along with a special section addressing the approach to complex calcified lesions.

One-Year Outcome of Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients Undergoing Initial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) for De Novo Lesion

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents (DES) are the major treatment option in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recently, drug-coated balloon (DCB) utilization has been increasing globally, leading to the expected new strategy of "stent-less PCI." This study aimed to evaluate the one-year outcome of DCB compared to DES.

METHODS

Patients who underwent initial PCI for de novo lesions in our institution from January 2018 to December 2021 (n=337) were subjected to retrospective analysis. Among them, 75 patients were treated with DCB, while 262 patients were treated with DES. Target lesion failure (TLF) was evaluated during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

The proportion of PCIs for ACS was significantly lower in the DCB group (DCB, n=23, 30.7% vs. DES, n=143, 54.6%; p=0.001). The median device diameter and length in the DES group were larger than those in the DCB group (DCB, 2.60 mm vs. DES, 2.98 mm; p<0.001; DCB, 19.1 mm vs. DES, 25.2 mm; p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the DCB and DES groups in lesion calcification. The proportion of ostial lesions was significantly higher in the DCB group (DCB, n=13, 17.3% vs. DES, n=21, 8.0%; p=0.018). The cumulative rate of TLF (DCB, n=5, 6.7% vs. DES, n=18, 6.9%; p=0.951) did not significantly differ between the DCB and DES groups.

CONCLUSION

DCB may be as effective a strategy as DES in the patient who underwent initial PCI for a de novo lesion.

Recurrent Revascularization at 10 Years After Percutaneous Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with recurrence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains particularly challenging, with data and guideline recommendations for repeat percutaneous coronary intervention being scant.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term incidence of recurrent revascularization events after percutaneous treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, 402 patients (500 lesions) assigned to plain balloon (PB), drug-coated balloon (DCB), or DES treatment in the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 (Efficacy Study of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon, -Stent vs. Plain Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis) trial were followed up over a median of 10.3 years. The primary endpoint was total repeat target lesion revascularization (R-TLR) including all, first and recurrent, events.

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, first R-TLR was required in 204 lesions, 82 in the PB group, 70 in the DCB group, and 52 in the DES group. The total number of R-TLRs was 373: 162 in the PB group, 124 in the DCB group, and 87 in the DES group. During the first year of follow-up, the risk for total R-TLR was reduced by DCB (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.24-0.54) and DES (HR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14-0.38) treatment compared with PB treatment. After 1 year, the risk for total R-TLR was nonsignificantly reduced by DCB treatment (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.16) and significantly reduced by DES treatment (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.95) compared with PB treatment. Risk in the DCB and DES groups was similar during (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.89-2.69) and after (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.82-1.92) 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

The total number of R-TLRs over 10 years after treatment of patients with DES ISR was high. DCBs and particularly DES were able to reduce the need for both first and recurrent revascularization compared with PB treatment.

Comparison of long-term outcome in patients with in-stent restenosis treated with intravascular lithotripsy or with modified balloon angioplasty

BACKGROUND

Modified balloon angioplasty (MB) using a cutting-/scoring balloon or intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is used in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, IVL is an off-label use in this setting. The aim of this subgroup analysis of an all-comers registry was to compare IVL to MB angioplasty in patients with ISR.

METHODS

The subgroup (n = 117) included all patients with an ISR treated by MB or IVL between 2019 and 2021. Primary endpoint was strategy success (< 20% residual stenosis). The secondary endpoint was cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and target lesion failure/revascularization (TVR). Quantitative coronary angiography was performed in all patients.

RESULTS

A total of n = 36 patients were treated by IVL and n = 81 patients by MB. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were observed between the groups. The primary endpoint was reached in 99 patients (84.6%). Patients in the IVL group had less residual stenosis (2.8% vs. 21.0%; p = 0.012). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that IVL had a significant positive effect on reaching the primary end point (Estimate 2.857; standard error (SE) 1.166; p = 0.014). During the follow-up period (450 days) there were no significant differences in rates of cardiac death (IVL n = 2 (1.7%) vs. MB n = 3 (2.6%); p = 0.643), AMI (IVL n = 2 (1.7%) vs. MB n = 4 (3.4%); p = 0.999) and TVR (IVL n = 5 (4.3%) vs. MB n = 14 (12%); p = 0.851).

CONCLUSION

IVL results in a significantly lower rate of residual stenosis than MB in patients with ISR. During the long-term follow-up, no differences in rates of cardiac death, AMI or TVR were observed.

Head-to-Head Comparison of 2 Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Femoropopliteal Lesions

BACKGROUND

There is a scarcity of published head-to-head comparisons between different paclitaxel-coated angioplasty balloons. More prospective safety data to support the health care economic reimbursement processes are needed.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to report the safety and efficacy of the Passeo-18 Lux drug-coated balloon (DCB) (Biotronik AG) for the treatment of symptomatic peripheral artery disease caused by stenosis, restenosis, or occlusion of the femoral and/or popliteal arteries.

METHODS

A total of 302 patients were randomized 1:1 and assigned to the Passeo-18 Lux DCB (study device) group or the IN.PACT Admiral DCB (control device, Medtronic Vascular) group for testing of noninferiority. The primary efficacy endpoint was freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of freedom from device-/procedure-related death through 30 days postindex procedure, major target limb amputation, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization at 12 months.

RESULTS

At 12 months, 130 of 134 patients in the IN.PACT Admiral group had freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (97.0%) compared with 137 of 141 patients in the Passeo-18 Lux group (97.2%). The primary safety endpoint showed 96.3% in the control group vs 95.7% in the study device group. The null hypothesis of inferiority on both efficacy and safety was rejected. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of primary patency at 1 year was 88.7% in the control arm vs 91.5% in the study device arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The Passeo-18 Lux and the IN.PACT Admiral DCBs demonstrate comparable results with excellent effectiveness and safety through 12 months for femoropopliteal interventions.

Clinical outcomes of coronary intravascular lithotripsy in patients with stent failure (COIL registry)

BACKGROUND

Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment of calcified de novo coronary lesions. Safety data on the use of IVL within stented segments are lacking. We sought to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and long-term outcomes of IVL in patients with stent failure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multi-centre registry that included consecutive patients with stent failure who had undergone IVL treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was procedural success defined as residual stenosis <30% (determined by quantitative coronary angiography analysis) in patients who survived hospital admission without in-hospital adverse events. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were defined as the composite endpoints of cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation at one-year follow up.

RESULTS

102 patients were included in this study. Mean age was 73 ± 9 years and 81% were male. The duration from previous stent implantation and IVL treatment was 24 (interquartile range 7-76) months, of which 10.8% received IVL for acute under-expanded stent. IVL treatment allowed significant improvement in both minimal lumen diameter (1.14 ± 0.60 to 2.53 ± 0.59, P < 0.001) and degree of stenosis (66.8 ± 19.9 to 20.3 ± 11.3%, P < 0.001). The rate of procedural success was 78.4% (80/102 of patients). The one-year MACE was 15.7%. Ostial disease (HR 5.16; 95% CI 1.19 to 22.33; P = 0.028) and lesion length (HR 1.05; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.10; P = 0.010) were independently associated with one-year MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stent failure, IVL is a safe and feasible treatment for this high-risk group.

Impact of Scoring Balloon Angioplasty on Lesion Preparation for DCB Treatment of Coronary Lesions

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of scoring balloon angioplasty for drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment in percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND

The scoring balloon angioplasty may play a pivotal role in enhancing the outcomes of DCB treatment.

METHODS

A total of 259 patients (278 lesions) with coronary artery disease successfully treated with DCB were retrospectively enrolled. The mean age of the patients was 62.2 ± 11.1 years, and the majority of patients were men (68.7%). The study's endpoint was defined as achieving an optimal angiographic result, which consisted of Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3, residual diameter stenosis ≤ 30%, and dissection less than type C after the procedure.

RESULTS

Angioplasty was performed for 61 lesions with a scoring balloon and 217 lesions with a non-scoring balloon. All lesions were TIMI flow grade 3 except two lesions in the non-scoring balloon group. The scoring balloon group had a higher prevalence of residual diameter stenosis ≤ 30% (68.9% vs. 39.6%, p < 0.001), while severe dissection, defined as type C or greater, was observed less frequently (9.8% vs. 31.8%, p = 0.001). Moreover, the scoring balloon group achieved a superior rate of optimal angiographic results (60.7% vs. 28.6%, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, scoring balloon (OR: 3.08 [95% confidence interval, 1.47-6.58], p = 0.003) and DCB balloon-to-artery ratios (OR: 5.46 [95% confidence interval, 1.43-21.93], p = 0.014) were independent factors in the increasing rate of optimal angiographic result.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of a scoring balloon catheter for lesion preparation, aiming to make them suitable for DCB treatment, was associated with a decreased risk of severe dissection and a greater occurrence of optimal angiographic outcomes compared with non-scoring balloon angioplasty.

Comparison of long-term outcome in patients with calcified stenosis treated with intravascular lithotripsy or with modified balloon angioplasty: a propensity score-adjusted study

Background

The aim of this two-center, all-comers registry was to compare the effectiveness and safety of intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) to that of modified balloon angioplasty (MB). MB angioplasty using a cutting or scoring balloon is commonly used in patients with calcified coronary arteries. IVL is a new technology for lesion preparation. This is the first study to compare MB with IVL.

Methods

The cohort included all patients treated by MB angioplasty or IVL between 2019 and 2021. The primary endpoint was strategy success (<20% residual stenosis). The secondary endpoint was long-term safety outcomes [cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), target lesion failure/revascularization (TVR)]. Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) was performed in all patients. Primary and secondary endpoints were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) for treatment effect estimation.

Results

A total of n = 86 patients were treated by IVL and n = 92 patients by MB angioplasty. The primary endpoint was reached in 152 patients (85.4%). Patients in the IVL group had less residual stenosis (5.8% vs. 22.8%; p = 0.001) in QCA. Weighted multivariable regression analysis revealed that IVL had a significant positive effect on reaching the primary endpoint of strategy success [odds ratio (OR) 24.58; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 7.40-101.86; p = 0.001]. In addition, severe calcification was shown to result in a lower probability of achieving the primary endpoint (OR 0.08; 95% CI 0.02-0.24; p = 0.001). During the follow-up period (450 days) there was no difference in cardiovascular mortality rate [IVL (n = 5) 2.8% vs. MB (n = 3) 1.7%; p = 0.129]. Patients with unstable angina at the time of the index procedure had the highest probability of cardiovascular death [hazard ratio (HR) 7.136; 95% CI 1.248-40.802; p = 0.027]. No differences were found in long-term rates of AMI (IVL 1.7% vs. MB 2.8%; p = 0.399; IVL HR 2.73; 95% CI 0.4-17.0; p = 0.281) or TVR (IVL 5.6% vs. MB 9%; p = 0.186; IVL HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.277-2.166; p = 0.626).

Conclusion

IVL leads to a significantly better angiographic intervention outcome compared to MB angioplasty in our cohort. During long-term follow-up, no differences in cardiovascular mortality, rate of acute myocardial infarction, or target lesion failure/revascularization were observed.

Which predilatation balloons provide the best lesion preparation prior to use of drug coated balloons in de-novo lesions? Results from the PREPARE study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data on the clinical outcomes following the use of different strategies for lesion preparation prior to the use of drug-coated balloons (DCB). In this study, we have explored the clinical outcomes between different types of predilatation balloons: semi-compliant (SB), non-compliant (NB) and scoring balloons (ScB) used when preparing de-novo lesions prior to the use of DCB.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated all patients who underwent treatment with DCB for de-novo lesions between 2011-2019 at 4 high-volume European centres. The measured study endpoints were cardiac-death, TV-MI, TLR and MACE.

RESULTS

During the study period, 553 patients were treated with DCB for de-novo lesions, 327 with SB only, 172 with NB and 54 with ScB. There were some differences in the procedural characteristics between the 3 groups. Predilatation balloons were significantly larger in the ScB, and NB groups as compared to the SB (2.7 mm and 2.6 mm vs. 2.3 mm; P<0.001). The reference vessel diameter was significantly larger in the NB group as compared to the ScB and SB (2.6 mm vs. 2.2 mm and 2.3 mm; P<0.001). During the median follow-up duration of 547-days, there were no differences in the hard-clinical endpoints, however, TLR was significantly higher in the ScB as compared to SB and NB group (11% vs. 3.4% and 4.7%; P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The PREPARE study results do not suggest routine use of ScB prior to DCB in de-novo lesions.

Clinical expert consensus document on drug-coated balloon for coronary artery disease from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) technology was developed to deliver the antiproliferative drugs to the vessel wall without leaving any permanent prosthesis or durable polymers. The absence of foreign material can reduce the risk of very late stent failure, improve the ability to perform bypass-graft surgery, and reduce the need for long-term dual antiplatelet therapy, potentially reducing associated bleeding complications. The DCB technology, like the bioresorbable scaffolds, is expected to be a therapeutic approach that facilitates the "leave nothing behind" strategy. Although newer generation drug-eluting stents are the most common therapeutic strategy in modern percutaneous coronary interventions, the use of DCB is steadily increasing in Japan. Currently, the DCB is only indicated for treatment of in-stent restenosis or small vessel lesions (< 3.0 mm), but potential expansion for larger vessels (≥ 3.0 mm) may hasten its use in a wider range of lesions or patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. The task force of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) was convened to describe the expert consensus on DCBs. This document aims to summarize its concept, current clinical evidence, possible indications, technical considerations, and future perspectives.

Comparing a strategy of sirolimus-eluting balloon treatment to drug-eluting stent implantation in de novo coronary lesions in all-comers: Design and rationale of the SELUTION DeNovo Trial

BACKGROUND

Drug eluting stents (DES) are associated with a 2% to 4% annual rate of target lesion failure through 5-to-10-year follow-up. The presence of a metallic protheses is a trigger for neo-atherosclerosis and very late stent thrombosis. A "leave nothing behind" strategy using Drug Coated Balloons has been suggested; however, paclitaxel coated balloons are only recommended in selected indications. Recently a novel sirolimus eluting balloon, the SELUTION SLR ^TM 014 PTCA balloon (SEB) (M.A. MedAlliance SA, Nyon, Switzerland) has been developed.

HYPOTHESIS

A strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with SEB and provisional DES is non-inferior to a strategy of systematic DES on target vessel failure (TVF) at one and five years. If non-inferiority is met at 5 years, superiority will be tested.

DESIGN

SELUTION DeNovo is a multi-center international open-label randomized trial. Subjects meeting eligibility criteria are randomized 1:1 to treatment of all lesions with either SEB and provisional DES or systematic DES. Major inclusion criteria are PCI indicated for ≥1 lesion considered suitable for treatment by either SEB or DES and clinical presentation with chronic coronary syndrome, unstable angina or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). There is no limitation in the number of lesions to be treated. Target lesions diameters are between 2 and 5 mm. Major exclusion criteria are lesions in the left main artery, chronic total occlusions, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and unstable non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Three thousand three hundred twenty six patients will be included in 50 sites in Europe and Asia. TVF rates and their components will be determined at 30 days, 6 months and annually up to 5 years post-intervention. Among secondary endpoints, bleeding events, cost-effectiveness data and net clinical benefits will be assessed.

SUMMARY

SELUTION DeNovo trial is an open-label, multi-center international randomized trial comparing a strategy of PCI with SEB and provisional DES to a strategy of PCI with systematic DES on TVF at one and five years. Non-inferiority will be tested at one and five years. If non-inferiority is met at five years, superiority will be tested.

A study of balloon type on calcified coronary lesion predilation: A finite element analysis

Calcified coronary lesions have been one of the more difficult types of lesion for interventional treatment, and angioplasty is required to break the calcification before stent implantation so that the stent can expand smoothly, however, it remains unclear which type of angioplasty is optimal for different calcified lesions. In this study, a finite element approach was used to model normal balloons, cutting balloons, and AngioSculpt balloons. In addition, calcified lesions of different degrees, thicknesses, and lengths were modeled according to Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) calcification grade. The above three balloons were used to pretreat calcified lesions, and the brittle fracture module for calcification was used to detect fracture success, to facilitate virtual stent implantation after predilation. The simulation results showed that with a thickness of less than 0.3 mm, balloons were unable to deal with calcified plaques in lesions of less than 120°, for 180° calcified lesions the cutting balloon fractured the calcified material at 1.2 MPa, the AngioSculpt balloon produced multiple fractures at 0.8 MPa for 270° calcified plaques, but was unable to fracture calcified lesions with a thickness of 0.4 mm. Based on these results, we conclude that the length of the lesion did not affect calcification fracture, while the thickness of the lesion did. In calcified lesions of approximately 180°, the cutting balloon showed the best predilation results, while the AngioSculpt balloon was optimal for 270°. In annular calcification, all three balloons were unable to fracture the lesion.

Contemporary percutaneous management of coronary calcification: current status and future directions

Severe coronary artery calcification is one of the greatest challenges in attaining success in percutaneous coronary intervention, limiting acute and long-term results. In many cases, plaque preparation is a critical prerequisite for delivery of devices across calcific stenoses and also to achieve adequate luminal dimensions. Recent advances in intracoronary imaging and adjunctive technologies now allow the operator to select the most appropriate strategy in each individual case. In this review, we will revisit the distinct advantages of a complete assessment of coronary artery calcification with imaging and application of appropriate and contemporary plaque modification technologies in achieving durable results in this complex lesion subset.

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis Using a Dedicated Super High-Pressure Balloon

BACKGROUND

Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is challenging and treatment failure rate remains high. Correction of stent under-expansion and neointimal compression using the twin-layer OPN™ highly non-compliant balloon (NCB) at high pressure (>30 atm) may lead to increased luminal gain and thus better clinical outcomes. We evaluated periprocedural safety and clinical long-term outcomes after ISR treatment using the OPN™ NCB in a real-world population.

METHODS

From an ongoing registry, consecutive ISR patients treated with the OPN™ NCB at a tertiary cardiology center in Switzerland were analyzed. We evaluated procedural efficacy, periprocedural complications, target lesion/vessel failure (TLF/TVF), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

RESULTS

Totally, 208 ISR lesions were treated in 188 patients (mean age 68 ± 13 years, 78 % males). Most lesions were moderately to heavily calcified (89 %), the majority (70.2 %) had complex lesion characteristics (AHA Type B2/C lesions) and 50.5 % were non-focal ISR lesions. After ISR treatment using high pressure pre- and post-dilatation (mean pressure 33 ± 6 atm) with the OPN™ NCB device, the rate of major complications was low (0.96 % coronary perforation, 4 % major dissections, 1.9 % no-reflow and 0.5 % acute vessel closure). At 1-year follow-up, MACE occurred in 19.7 %; 15.4 % patients had TVF; MI and stent thrombosis was found in 5.9 % and 2.1 % of all patients, respectively; and 5 patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

For ISR treatment, using the super non-compliant OPN™ balloon at very high pressures is safe. Moreover, its use might lead to a low rate of TLF/TVF during long-term follow-up, but this requires further evaluation in dedicated comparative trials.

Novel application of drug-coated balloons in coronary heart disease: A narrative review

The incidence of coronary heart disease (CAD) has soared over the years, and coronary intervention has become an increasingly important therapeutic approach. The past decade has witnessed unprecedented developments in therapeutic medical instruments. Given that drug-coated balloons bring many benefits, they are indicated for an increasing number of conditions. In this article, we review the results of current clinical trials about drug-coated balloons and summarize their safety and clinical progression in different coronary artery diseases, laying the groundwork for basic research, and clinical therapeutics of this patient population.

Intravascular Imaging for Guiding In-Stent Restenosis and Stent Thrombosis Therapy

Advances in stent technology and the design of endovascular devices with thinner struts, anti-inflammatory and antithrombotic polymers, and better drug kinetics have enhanced the safety and efficacy of the second-generation drug-eluting stents and broadened their use in the therapy of high-risk patients and complex anatomies. However, despite these developments, in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis remain the Achilles' heel of percutaneous coronary intervention, with their cumulative incidence reaching up to 10% at 5 years following percutaneous coronary intervention. The treatment of stent failure poses challenges and is associated with a worse prognosis than conventional percutaneous coronary intervention. Several studies have recently highlighted the value of intravascular imaging in identifying causes of stent failure, underscored its role in treatment planning, and registries have shown that its use may be associated with better clinical outcomes. The present review aims to summarize the evidence in the field; it discusses the value of intravascular imaging in identifying the mechanisms of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis in assessing the morphological characteristics of neointima tissue that appears to determine long-term outcomes in evaluating procedural results, and presents the findings of studies supporting its value in guiding therapy in stent failure.

The factors influencing the efficiency of drug-coated balloons

The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an emerging percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device that delivers drugs to diseased vessels to decrease the rate of vascular stenosis. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that DCBs tend to have both good safety and efficacy profiles, leading to extended application indications in the clinic, including in-stent restenosis (ISR) for metal stents such as drug-eluting stents (DESs), small vascular disease, bifurcation disease, large vascular disease, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and high bleeding risk. However, some previous clinical data have suggested that DCBs performed less effectively than DESs. No studies or reviews have systematically discussed the improvement strategies for better DCB performance until now. Drug loss during the process of delivery to the target lesion and inefficient delivery of the coating drug to the diseased vascular wall are two key mechanisms that weaken the efficiency of DCBs. This review is the first to summarize the key influencing factors of DCB efficiency in terms of balloon structure and principles, and then it analyzes how these factors cause outcomes in practice based on current clinical trial studies of DCBs in the treatment of different types of lesions. We also provide some recommendations for improving DCBs to contribute to better DCB performance by improving the design of DCBs and combining other factors in clinical practice.

Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

The introduction and subsequent iterations of drug-eluting stent technologies have substantially improved the efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary interventions. However, the incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and the resultant need for repeated revascularization still occur at a rate of 1%-2% per year. Given that millions of drug-eluting stents are implanted each year around the globe, ISR can be considered as a pathologic entity of public health significance. The mechanisms of ISR are multifactorial. Since the first description of the angiographic patterns of ISR, the advent of intracoronary imaging has further elucidated the mechanisms and patterns of ISR. The armamentarium and treatment strategies of ISR have also evolved over time. Currently, an individualized approach using intracoronary imaging to characterize the underlying substrate of ISR is recommended. In this paper, we comprehensively reviewed the incidence, mechanisms, and imaging characterization of ISR and propose a contemporary treatment algorithm.

Management of in-stent restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the most common cause of stent failure after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent data suggest that ISR-PCI accounts for 5-10% of all PCI procedures performed in current clinical practice. This State-of-the-Art review will primarily focus on the management of ISR but will begin by briefly discussing diagnosis and classification. We then move on to detail the evidence base underpinning the various therapeutic strategies for ISR before finishing with a proposed ISR management algorithm based on current scientific data.

Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Drug-Coated Balloon

The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an emerging percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device with theoretical advantages and promising results. Recent clinical observations have demonstrated that DCB tends to have both good efficacy and a good safety profile in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) for both bare-metal and drug-eluting stents (DES), de novo coronary artery disease (CAD), and other situation, such as high bleeding risk, chronic total occlusion, and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become an essential medication in daily clinical practice, but the optimal duration of DAPT after the implantation of a DCB remains unknown. At the time of the first in vivo implantation of paclitaxel-DCB for the treatment of ISR in 2006, the protocol-defined DAPT duration was only 1 month. Subsequently, DAPT duration ranging from 1 to 12 months has been recommended by various trials. However, there have been no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the optimal duration of DAPT after DCB angioplasty. Current clinical guidelines normally recommend the duration of DAPT after DCB-only angioplasty based on data from RCTs on the optimal duration of DAPT after stenting. In this review, we summarized current clinical trials on DCB-only angioplasty for different types of CADs and their stipulated durations of DAPT, and compared their clinical results such as restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stent thrombosis event. We hope this review can assist clinicians in making reasonable decisions about the duration of DAPT after DCB implantation.

Comparison of Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty vs. Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis in the Routine Clinical Practice: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction: In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a challenging issue despite the great advance of drug-eluting stents (DES). In addition, the consensus was lacking regarding the optimal strategy for DES-ISR. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate angiographic and clinical outcomes of the two most effective treatments DES vs. drug-eluting balloon (DCB) for patients with DES-ISR. Methods: This meta-analysis used the data from the randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were identified by a systematic search in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was regarded as the primary endpoint. In addition, the late angiographic outcomes and other clinical outcomes, namely, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and major adverse cardiac events, were also included for analysis. Results: Five RCTs with about 1,193 patients were included in this meta-analysis for the analysis. For the primary endpoint, the overall pooled outcomes suggested repeat DES implantation was associated with a significant reduction in the term of TLR compared with DCB angioplasty (risk ratio = 1.53, 95% CI 1.15-2.04, p = 0.003). But no significant difference in angiographic outcomes and other clinical endpoints were observed between DES and DCB. In the subgroup analysis, DCB was inferior to new-generation DES (NG-DES)/everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in the term of TLR. In addition, this non-significant trend was also noted in the subgroup of the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) vs. DCB. For the angiographic endpoints, EES, not PES, was associated with larger minimum lumen diameter [mean difference (MD) = -0.25, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.11, p = 0.0003], lower percent diameter stenosis (MD = 7.29%, 95% CI 2.86-11.71%, p = 0.001), and less binary restenosis (OR = 2.20, 95% CI 1.18-4.11, p = 0.01). But NG-DES/EES was comparable to DCB in cardiac death, MI, and stent thrombosis. Conclusions: For the patients with DES-ISR, treatment with DES, especially NG-DES/EES could reduce the risk of TLR significantly compared to DCB at long-term follow-up.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

A prospective trial of a novel low-dose paclitaxel-coated balloon therapy in patients with restenosis in drug-eluting coronary stents Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Optimizing Treatment of Drug Eluting Stent In-stent REstenosis 3A (ISAR-DESIRE 3A)

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the clinical efficacy of a paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) with a novel matrix coating and reduced drug concentration in comparison with a widely used PCB with iopromide excipient.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with restenosis in drug-eluting stents. All patients were treated with a novel low-dose PCB with citrate-based excipient (Agent PCB). Angiographic follow-up was scheduled at 6-8 months. Outcomes were compared against those of patients treated with iopromide excipient PCB (SeQuent Please PCB) enrolled in a trial with identical inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was percent diameter stenosis (%DS) at follow-up angiography. The primary hypothesis was that the investigational device would be non-inferior to the control device (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02367495).

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five patients with 151 lesions were enrolled. Mean age was 68.1 ± 10.2 years, 40.8% had diabetes mellitus and 80.1% had focal morphology in-stent restenosis. Follow-up angiography data at 6-8 months was available for 102 (81.6%) patients. The Agent PCB was non-inferior to the SeQuent Please PCB in terms of the primary endpoint (38.9 ± 17.5 vs. 38.1 ± 21.5%; p _{non-inferiority}  = 0.0056). Late lumen loss was also comparable between the groups (0.35 ± 0.55 vs. 0.37 ± 0.59; p = 0.71). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of TLR (27.7% vs. 22.1%; p = 0.31), death or myocardial infarction (4.2% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.92) or target lesion thrombosis (1.0% vs. 0.7%; p = 0.93).

CONCLUSION

In patients with DES restenosis, angioplasty with a novel PCB with citrate-based excipient was non-inferior to PCB with iopromide excipient in terms of angiographic outcome.

[Contribution of optical coherence tomography in the management of intrastent restenosis]

Intrastent restenosis (ISR) remains a common problem in interventional cardiology. Angiographic data are limited in assessing ISR. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a high-resolution endocoronary imaging technique. It allows individualization of the stent struts and thus reveals stent under-expansion or fracture, which are sometimes difficult to demonstrate on angiography. Restenotic tissue is also identified and can be classified as homogeneous neointima, heterogeneous neointima or neoatherosclerosis. OCT therefore helps guide the treatment of ISR, which varies depending on the etiology. This imaging technique also allows us to verify that the criteria for successful angioplasty have been met and thus to correct a potential risk factor for recurrence of ISR. These remarks are illustrated by two clinical cases. OCT is now validated in this indication, it remains to validate the interest of the technique on the follow-up of the patients and to integrate the new tools at our disposal.

Long-term outcomes after deferral of revascularization of in-stent restenosis using fractional flow reserve

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the outcomes of deferred coronary revascularization in patients with non-significant in-stent restenosis (ISR) by physiological assessment.

BACKGROUND

The pathophysiology and natural history of ISR is markedly different from de-novo stenoses. There is a paucity of data on the safety of deferral of revascularization of ISR using physiological assessment.

METHODS

In this single centre study, using a propensity-score matched analysis, we compared the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with ISR and de-novo disease deferred based on intracoronary physiology. Matching was on a 1:2 basis of ISR to de-novo stenosis. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) a composite of all-cause mortality, target lesion revascularization or target vessel myocardial infarction at 36 months.

RESULTS

Matched cohorts of 56 ISR and 112 de-novo stenoses were analyzed. The median percentage stenosis was 50% in both groups (p = 0.403). Deferral was based on fractional flow reserve (FFR). The mean FFR was 0.86 across both groups (p = 0.942). At 36-months, freedom from MACE was similar between groups; 86.2% versus 92.8% log rank p=0.180 for ISR and de-novo lesions, respectively. Neither were there differences in the individual components of MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Deferral of coronary revascularization in patients with ISR based on its functional impact is associated to similar long-term safety as in de-novo coronary stenosis.

Long-term Outcome following Percutaneous Intervention of Intra-stent Coronary Occlusion and Evaluating the Different Treatment Modalities

•

Limited data on intra-stent CTO.

•

We explored the long-term outcomes in patients undergoing PCI to intra-stent CTO.

•

Acceptable rates of hard endpoints (cardiac death; 5.8%, TVMI; 4%).

•

High rates of TLR (45.6%).

•

PCI should only be undertaken if symptomatic or if there is inducible ischaemia.

•

If PCI is undertaken, DCB and DES should be considered over POBA.

Background

Angioplasty for ISR remains a challenge with relatively high rates of recurrence. Although there is a plethora of data on ISR, there is relatively less data on intra-stent-CTO. In this study, we explore the long-term clinical outcomes following angioplasty to intra-stent CTO and study the differences in clinical outcomes between three treatment-arms: POBA vs. DES vs. DCB.

Methods and results

We evaluated all patients who underwent PCI to intra-stent CTO between 2011 and 2017. The endpoints used were: cardiac-death, TVMI, TLR, TVR, and MACE.

During the study period, 403-patients with a mean age of 69.2 years had successful PCI to intra-stent CTO. 50% were diabetic, 38% had CKD and 32% had left ventricular dysfunction. 93% of cases were stable angina. 22% (n = 88) received only POBA, 28% (n = 113) received DCB and 50% (n = 202) received DES. During the median follow-up of 48-months, cardiac-death occurred in 5.8% (n = 23), TVMI in 4% (n = 16), TLR in 45.6% (n = 182), TVR in 48.7% (n = 194) and MACE of 46%. There were no differences in the hard endpoints between the 3treatment arms. However, the TLR and overall MACE were better in DCB and DES-groups as compared to POBA (TLR: 33%vs.42%vs.49%; p = 0.06); MACE (34% vs. 45% vs. 52%; p = 0.05).

Conclusion

This is the first study that has focussed on the outcomes following angioplasty to intra-stent CTOs with a very long-term follow-up. The hard endpoints were low, although the TLR rates were high. In regards to treatment strategy, the DCB and DES provide relatively better outcomes than POBA.

Results of paclitaxel-drug-coated balloons (Pantera Lux) for coronary in-stent restenosis: Italian experience from REGistry of Paclitaxel Eluting Balloon in ISR study

AIMS

Drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is an effective treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, literature data indicate that drug-coated balloons (DCBs) may be a valid alternative, particularly for recurrent ISR. We sought to evaluate clinical results on the long-term efficacy of a new DCB for ISR treatment.

METHODS

One hundred and ninety-nine patients were treated with paclitaxel drug-coated balloons (Pantera Lux, Biotronik, Switzerland) in the Italian REGistry of Paclitaxel Eluting Balloon in ISR (REGPEB study). Clinical follow-up was scheduled at 1 and 12 months. A subgroup of patients received adjunctive 5-year follow-up. Primary end point was Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) at 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 214 ISR coronary lesions were treated (75.4% DES-ISR). Mean time between stent implantation and DCB treatment is 41 months. DCBs were successfully delivered in 99% of the cases; crossover to a DES occurred in 3% of cases. Procedural success rate was 98.5%. Clinical success rate was 98.5%. First-month follow-up compliance was 98% and freedom from MACE was 96.9%. Twelve-month follow-up compliance was 89.3% with a freedom from MACE rate of 87.3% (CI: 81.3-91.5%). Five-year long-term follow-up showed 65.2% of freedom from MACE.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms that Pantera Lux treatment is effective and well tolerated in ISR, showing good acute and long/very long-term results in the treatment of complex lesions (DES and late ISR).

Paclitaxel Coated Balloon vs. Bare Metal Stent for Endovascular Treatment of Symptomatic Vertebral Artery Origin Stenosis Patients: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Stenting treatment for refractory symptomatic patients with vertebral artery origin stenosis (VAOS) is safe; however, there is a high rate of in-stent restenosis. Although drug-eluting stents can reduce the incidence of restenosis to some extent, there is still a risk caused by stent fracture. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) has been proven to reduce the rate of restenosis in peripheral and coronary artery disease. DCB can prevent inflammation caused by extraneous material stimulation and allow the subsequent treatment that is characteristic of "leave nothing behind." The purpose of this trial is to compare the efficacy and safety of DCB and bare metal stent (BMS) in the treatment of VAOS. Method/Design: This trial is a 1:1 randomized, controlled, multicenter, non-inferiority trial that compares the DCB to BMS in terms of angiographically assessed target lesion binary restenosis (≥50%) at 12 months in endovascular treatment of symptomatic patients with VAOS. Discussion: A total of 180 patients with symptomatic VAOS who match the trial eligibility criteria will be randomized 1:1 to treatment with DCB (n = 90) or BMS (n = 90). An angiographic core laboratory-adjudicated target lesion binary restenosis (≥50%) at 12 months of follow-up was selected as primary efficacy endpoint to assess the DCB treatment effect. A clinical events committee will assess the safety endpoints of all-cause death, target vessel related transient ischemic attack and ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke events. A data safety monitoring board will periodically review safety data for subject safety, the study conduct, and progress. In this trial, randomization is only allowed after successful pre-dilatation. We anticipate that this trial will provide rigorous data to clarify whether DCBs are beneficial in patients with symptomatic VAOS. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03910166.

Optimized strategy of rotational atherectomy of underexpanded coronary stents in patients with acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Stent under-expansion is a main cause of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), which can lead to serious clinical outcomes. The rotational atherectomy of underexpanded coronary stents (academically called stent ablation, SA) by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) may provide more visual reference in the intervention. We aim to analyze the procedural and long-term outcomes of the optimized strategy of SA in patients with ACS and to provide real-world data on this technique.

METHODS

A total of 11 patients with ACS who underwent SA between April 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed. Clinical follow-ups were obtained either by telephone call or by scheduled visit. Clinical end-points included periprocedural and postprocedural myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 69.6±6.5 years, and five (45.5%) patients were males. All cases presented with unstable angina and were admitted with ACS. All patients required at least two burrs during the intervention and the size of the burr was selected based on the data of minimum lumen diameter (MLD), and the first and the second burr/stent MLD ratios were 0.93 (0.88-0.99) and 1.09 (1.02-1.14), respectively. Nine patients were treated with drug-eluting stents and two were treated with drug-coated balloons. There were no complications including no flow, perforation, or burr entrapment during the intervention. No in-hospital deaths or major adverse cardiac events were documented during the follow-up period. In our study, less contrast agent and a lower dose of radiation were used during the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

SA guided by IVUS can reduce the risk of complications, assess the results of surgery, inform the selection of stent size, and decrease the required dose of radiation and contrast.

Effect of Multiple Prior Percutaneous Coronary Interventions on Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

The effect of multiple prior percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) before subsequent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on long-term outcomes has not been well elucidated.Methods and Results:Between 2007 and 2016, 1,154 patients undergoing primary isolated CABG in our institution had no prior PCI (Group N), 225 had a single prior PCI (Group S), and 272 had multiple prior PCIs (Group M). Cumulative incidences of all-cause death, cardiac death and myocardial infarction (MI) at 10 years post-CABG were highest in Group M. After adjusting for confounders, the risk of all-cause death was higher in Group M than in Group N (hazard ratio [HR] 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.91; P<0.01). Between Groups N and S, however, the risk of all-cause death was not different. The risks of cardiac death and MI were likewise higher in Group M than in Group N (HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.55-3.71; P<0.01 and HR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.16-11.5; P=0.03, respectively), but not different between Groups N and S. The risk of repeat revascularization was not different among any of the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple prior PCIs was associated with higher risks of long-term death and cardiovascular events. The incidence of repeat revascularization after CABG was low regardless of the history of single/multiple PCIs.

Possible mechanism of late lumen enlargement after treatment for de novo coronary lesions with drug-coated balloon

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment for de novo coronary artery disease has demonstrated late lumen enlargement (LLE) in mid-term follow-up and it was considered as clinical benefit; however, its mechanism and the predictive factor remains unclear.

METHODS

This study enrolled 46 consecutive patients (54 lesions) treated with DCB, using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) at the index procedure and at the 9-month follow-up. We measured IVUS parameters at 1-mm intervals and calculated the mean volume of the external elastic membrane (EEM), lumen, and plaque. We calculated the dissection index (DI) defined as summation of the following points, 2: dissection over EEM, 1: intra-EEM dissection, 0: no dissection at every 1-mm interval, and divided by lesion length.

RESULTS

IVUS showed that there was no flow limiting dissection just after DCB treatment, the mean EEM and lumen volume (LV) had significantly increased while mean plaque volume had significantly decreased at 9 months, and 74.1% lesions exhibited LLE. We divided the patients into three groups according to delta mean LV. Mean EEM volume significantly increased and mean plaque volume significantly decreased in the larger and smaller LLE groups, but not in the non-LLE group. The DI was higher in a descending order in the three groups. The multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the DI was the strongest predictor of the change in mean LV.

CONCLUSIONS

LLE after DCB treatment may be caused by vessel enlargement and plaque regression. The non-flow limiting larger dissection just after DCB treatment may strongly associate with the intending LLE.

Drug-coated balloon for vertebral artery origin stenosis: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a potential treatment for patients with low restenosis risk in vertebral artery origin stenosis (VAOS). However, the clinical data of long-term outcome are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a DCB in patients with severe VAOS.

METHODS

A prospective, non-randomized, single-center pilot study enrolled 30 patients with severe VAOS treated with DCB between 2017 and 2018. The first 20 patients were treated with a balloon-to-vessel ratio of predilation (pBVR)＜0.8 (small-size balloon predilation) and the following 10 patients were treated with a pBVR 0.8-1.0 (large-size balloon predilation). Primary safety endpoints included 30-day death, stroke, and transient ischemic attack (TIA). The main efficacy outcome was restenosis at 6 months, defined as a peak systolic velocity >140 cm/s measured by Doppler ultrasound. Long-term outcomes, including TIAs, stroke, death, and modified Rankin Scale score, were followed up to 2 years.

RESULTS

Technical success (<50% residual stenosis) was achieved in 26 patients (mean age 66.2±7.0; seven women). Four patients received bailout stenting and were excluded. Ultrasound confirmed restenosis at 6 months in 10 (38.5%) of 26, which was significantly less frequent in LSBP (LSBP vs SSBP=10% vs 56.3%, p<0.05). No adverse events occurred within 30 days of treatment. 19 patients were followed up for 2 years, with two deaths due to cancer.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggests that DCB is a safe approach for VAOS. The relatively low restenosis rate indicates the its potential long-term efficacy for VAOS. Future randomized controlled trials to confirm its efficacy are warranted.

Clinical implication of neointimal burden in in-stent restenosis treated with drug-coated balloon

BACKGROUND

Although drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty is a well-established drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) strategy, there are minimal data regarding the association of neointimal burden on optical coherence tomography (OCT) before and after DCB and adverse clinical events. This study aimed to investigate the clinical impact of neointimal burden measured with OCT in patients with DES ISR after DCB angioplasty.

METHODS

From 2010 through 2013, a total of 122 patients with 122 ISR lesions were treated with DCB, which was preceded and followed by OCT examination. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite occurrence of cardiovascular cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) were evaluated.

RESULTS

MACE occurred in 27 patients (4 nonfatal MIs and 23 TLRs) during the follow-up (median: 55.3 months, interquartile range 43.1-66.0). The mean lumen area was significantly smaller (3.21 ± 2.42 mm² vs. 4.80 ± 2.53 mm² , p = .005) and the mean percentage of neointimal volume derived by OCT was greater (49.3 ± 9.2% vs. 38.3 ± 17.5%, p = .006) in patients with MACE before DCB angioplasty. The pre-procedural mean percentage of neointimal volume (cut-off 50%, area under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve = 0.644, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.531-0.758, p = .022) and post-procedural mean percentage of neointimal volume (cut-off 25%, area under ROC curve = 0.659, 95% CI = 0.546-0.773, p = .012) were identified as significant parameters to predict MACE.

CONCLUSION

The OCT-derived mean percentages of neointimal volume before and after DCB angioplasty can be important parameters for predicting future MACE in patients with DES ISR.

Provisional drug-coated balloon treatment guided by physiology on de novo coronary lesion

Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have become the mainstay of percutaneous coronary intervention, late and very late stent thrombosis remains a concern. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have the advantage of preserving the anti-restenotic benefits of DES while minimizing potential long-term safety concerns. Currently the two methods to ensure successful DCB treatment of a stenotic lesion are angiography or physiology-guided DCB application. This review will evaluate these two methods based on previous evidence and make suggestions on how to perform DCB treatment more efficiently and safely.

Scoring balloon predilation before bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in patients with in-stent restenosis: the RIBS VI 'scoring' study

BACKGROUND

Currently drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-eluting balloons are recommended in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) after scoring balloon (SCB) predilation in these patients is unknown.

METHODS

RIBS VI (NCT02672878) and RIBS VI 'Scoring' (NCT03069066) are prospective multicentre studies assessing the value of BVS in patients with ISR. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical in both studies. Results of conventional BVS implantation (112 patients) were compared with those obtained with systematic SCB therapy before BVS (108 patients). Angiographic follow-up was scheduled for all patients.

RESULTS

On late angiography (93% of eligible patients) the in-segment minimal lumen diameter (primary end-point) (1.88 ± 0.5 vs. 1.90 ± 0.4 mm, P = 0.81), % diameter stenosis (28 ± 17 vs. 29 ± 15%), late lumen loss (0.23 ± 0.4 vs. 0.22 ± 0.4 mm) and binary restenosis rate (8.5 vs. 9.3%) were similar in the conventional BVS and SCB + BVS groups, respectively. At 1-year follow-up (100% of patients) target lesion revascularization (TLR) requirement (9.8 vs. 11.1%) was similar with the two strategies. Freedom from cardiac death, myocardial infarction and TLR was 88% and 87%, respectively. Results remained unchanged after adjusting for potential baseline confounders and were consistent in 10 prespecified subgroups.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that results of conventional BVS implantation in patients with ISR are not improved by systematic predilation with SCB. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02672878 (RIBS VI) and NCT03069066 (RIBS VI 'Scoring').