Sirolimus-Coated Balloon in an All-Comer Population of Coronary Artery Disease Patients: The EASTBOURNE Prospective Registry

Vascular Response, Downstream Effect, and Pharmacokinetics After Sirolimus- and Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons in Porcine Coronary Arteries

BACKGROUND

Paclitaxel (PCB) and sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) are major therapeutic options for coronary artery disease, but there is no direct head-to-head histological comparison of their effects during the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

AIMS

We aimed to investigate the vascular and downstream effects and drug pharmacokinetics in a porcine coronary model treated with MagicTouch-SCB (MT-SCB), Selution-SRL-SCB (SEL-SCB), Agent PCB, and plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA).

METHODS

Twenty-eight coronary arteries from 10 pigs were treated with one of three drug-coated balloons (DCBs) (n = 7 for each) or POBA (n = 7) with 28 days follow-up. In six pigs, histological assessment was performed for the arterial response with semi-quantified scoring. In four pigs, sirolimus and paclitaxel concentrations were measured in the coronary artery and downstream myocardium. All 10 animals were histologically assessed for downstream effects on the myocardium for distal emboli and tissue injury.

RESULTS

All DCBs showed minimal neointimal formation, but the MT-SCB and SEL-SCB showed less medial SMC loss compared to the PCB. In the histology section-based analysis of downstream myocardium, PCB showed evidence of myocyte necrosis/scarring in 21% of sections, whereas there was no evidence in the other groups (p < 0.01). POBA had the lowest downstream emboli (6%), followed by MT-SCB (15%), SEL-SCB (25%), and PCB (36%) (p = 0.02). In the pharmacokinetic analysis, paclitaxel showed higher concentration after PCB treatment compared to sirolimus after both two SCBs treatment in coronary and downstream myocardium.

CONCLUSION

MT-SCB and SEL-SCB demonstrated less arterial injury, less downstream effect, and lower drug concentration compared to PCB during PCI.

Comparing the Efficacy of Sirolimus and Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Catheters in the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A Prospective Randomized Study (TIS 2 Study)

BACKGROUND

Current therapy for in-stent restenosis (ISR) is based on drug-eluting stents (DES) or drug-eluting balloon catheters. This prospective randomized study compared the efficacy of a novel sirolimus-eluting balloon (SEB) catheter to that of a paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB) catheter for the treatment of bare-metal stent (BMS-ISR) or DES-ISR.

METHODS

A total of 145 patients with 158 BMS or DES-ISR lesions were randomly assigned to the treatment with either SEB or PEB. The in-segment late lumen loss at 12 months, the 12-month incidence of binary ISR, and major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The noninferiority of SEB compared with PEB in the treatment of BMS/DES-ISR with respect to late lumen loss was not demonstrated (Δlate lumen loss, -0.024 mm [95% CI, -0.277 to 0.229]; for a noninferiority margin of 0.20 mm), except in the post hoc subanalysis for the BMS-ISR group (-0.203 mm [95% CI, -0.584 to 0.178]). No significant differences in the incidence of repeated binary ISR (31.6% versus 30.4%, P=0.906) or 12-month major adverse cardiac events (31% for both; P>0.999) between the SEB and PEB groups were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The noninferiority of SEB relative to PEB in the treatment of BMS/DES-ISR with respect to late lumen loss was not confirmed.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03667313.

Safety and Performance of the MOZEC Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Balloon in the Treatment of Stenotic Coronary Artery Lesions: A Real-World, Multicenter, Post-Marketing Surveillance Study

Background

Drug-eluting balloons, surface-coated with antiproliferative agents such as sirolimus or paclitaxel, have emerged as an alternative therapeutic option for coronary stenosis. This study evaluated safety and effectiveness of the MOZEC sirolimus-eluting percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) balloon dilation catheter (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., India) across diverse clinical scenarios in coronary artery stenosis treatment.

Methods

A prospective, single-arm, multicenter, real-world, post-marketing surveillance study evaluated the safety and performance of the MOZEC sirolimus-eluting balloon (SEB) in treating native coronary artery disease in daily clinical practice. Patients were followed for 24 months, with clinical visits or telephonic calls at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after the index procedure. Safety endpoints included major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and performance endpoints include change in late lumen loss, clinical success, and device success.

Results

A total of 141 patients were enrolled in the study. The MOZEC SEB was used in 127 (70.17%) de novo lesions, 40 (22.1%) in-stent restenosis lesions, and 14 (7.73%) bifurcations lesions. Over the 24-month follow-up period (n = 134), six cumulative MACEs (4.47%) were observed, comprising two cardiac deaths (1.49%), five myocardial infarctions (3.73%), and four target lesion revascularizations (2.99%). Late lumen loss analysis included 17 patients who underwent additional coronarography at the 6-month follow-up. In-segment and in-device late lumen loss at 6-month follow-up was 0.14 ± 0.37 mm.

Conclusions

The application of MOZEC SEB in various clinical scenarios demonstrated safety and efficacy over long-term follow-up. These findings align with the favorable vessel healing observed during the 6-month imaging follow-up.

Angiographic and clinical impact of balloon inflation time in percutaneous coronary interventions with sirolimus-coated balloon: A subanalysis of the EASTBOURNE study

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an attractive strategy for the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). The implantation technique strongly influences the outcome of DCB PCI: accurate and adequate lesion preparation, short delivery time and sufficient DCB inflation time are deemed crucial to warrant adequate drug transfer and mitigate the risk of immediate vessel recoil and flow-limiting dissections. However, the optimal DCB inflation time is unclear, current consensus documents suggesting 30-60 s based on Experts' opinion. However, clinical studies comparing the prognostic role of different inflation times are scarce and mainly involve paclitaxel-coated balloons. In this study we aimed to assess the impact of different inflation times in patients undergoing PCI with a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB).

METHODS

We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the prospective, multicenter, EASTBOURNE study, classified into two study groups according to balloon inflation time: long (>30 s) versus short (≤30 s). The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 24-month follow-up. Secondary clinical endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACE), death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and BARC 2-5 bleedings. Furthermore, angiographic endpoints (the rate of bailout stenting and post-procedural TIMI flow <3) were also addressed.

RESULTS

A total of 2289 lesions (2092 in the long inflation group, 197 in the short inflation group) were included in the analysis. Median balloon inflation time was 60 s in the long inflation and 30 s in the short inflation group. The two study groups experienced a similar rate of TLR [6.2 % in the short versus 6.3 % in the long inflation group, p = 1.00] as well MACE (p = 0.683), death (p = 0.102), non-fatal MI (p = 0.822), and BARC 2-5 bleedings (p = 0.252). These results were consistent when considering subpopulations with different target lesion phenotypes (in-stent restenosis, de-novo lesions, large and small vessels). Interesting, the rate of bailout stent implantation and post-procedural TIMI flow <3 was higher in the short SCB inflation time, as compared to the standard strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Short vs. long SCB inflation time is associated with a higher need of bailout stenting after PCI with SCB, with similar clinical outcomes at 24-month follow-up.

Stepwise dual antiplatelet therapy de-escalation in patients after drug coated balloon angioplasty (REC-CAGEFREE II): multicentre, randomised, open label, assessor blind, non-inferiority trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether a less intense antiplatelet regimen could be used for people receiving drug coated balloons.

DESIGN

Multicentre, randomised, open label, assessor blind, non-inferiority trial (REC-CAGEFREE II).

SETTING

41 hospitals in China between 27 November 2021 and 21 January 2023.

PARTICIPANTS

1948 adults (18-80 years) with acute coronary syndrome who received treatment exclusively with paclitaxel-coated balloons according to the international drug coated balloon consensus.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the stepwise dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) de-escalation group (n=975) consisting of aspirin plus ticagrelor for one month, followed by five months of ticagrelor monotherapy, and then six months of aspirin monotherapy, or to the standard DAPT group (n=973) consisting of aspirin plus ticagrelor for 12 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was net adverse clinical events (all cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, revascularisation, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding) at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. Non-inferiority was established if the upper limit of the one sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the absolute risk difference was smaller than 3.2%.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 59.2 years, 74.9% were men, 30.5% had diabetes, and 20.6% were at high bleeding risk. 60.9% of treated lesions were in small vessels, and 17.8% were in-stent restenosis. The mean drug coated balloon diameter was 2.72 mm (standard deviation 0.49). At 12 months, the primary endpoint occurred in 87 (8.9%) participants in the stepwise de-escalation group and 84 (8.6%) in the standard group (difference 0.36%; upper boundary of the one sided 95% CI 2.47%; Pnon-inferiority=0.013). In the stepwise de-escalation versus standard groups, BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding occurred in four versus 16 participants (0.4% v 1.6%, difference -1.19% (95% CI -2.07% to -0.31%), P=0.008), and all cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and revascularisation occurred in 84 versus 74 participants (8.6% v 7.6%, difference 1.05% (95% CI -1.37% to 3.47%), P=0.396). Treated as having hierarchical clinical importance by the win ratio method, more wins were noted with the stepwise de-escalation group (14.4% wins) compared with the standard group (10.1% wins) for the predefined hierarchical composite endpoint of all cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, BARC type 3 bleeding, revascularisation, and BARC type 2 bleeding (win ratio 1.43 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.83), P=0.004). Results from the per-protocol and the intention-to-treat analysis were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Among participants with acute coronary syndrome who could be treated by drug coated balloons exclusively, a stepwise DAPT de-escalation was non-inferior to 12 month DAPT for net adverse clinical events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04971356.

Sirolimus-coated versus paclitaxel-coated balloons for bifurcated coronary lesions in the side branch: the SPACIOUS trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy to treat coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL) has been a long-debated topic. The combination of a stent in the main vessel (MV) and a drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the side branch (SB) seems promising, but the evidence is limited.

AIMS

This study aims to investigate a novel sirolimus-coated balloon in the treatment of non-left main CBL compared with a paclitaxel-coated balloon.

METHODS

The SPACIOUS trial is a prospective, non-inferiority, multicentre trial. A total of 230 patients were randomised to the sirolimus DCB or the paclitaxel DCB group in a 1:1 ratio. Angiographic and clinical follow-ups were planned at 9 months and 1 year, respectively. The primary endpoint was diameter stenosis (DS) in the SB at 9 months.

RESULTS

At 9 months, DS in the sirolimus group was 30.5±16.1% compared with 33.5±16.2% in the paclitaxel group (difference -2.94%; 95% confidence interval: -7.62% to 1.74%; p for non-inferiority<0.01). The incidence of binary restenosis was significantly lower in the sirolimus group compared to the paclitaxel group (4.4% vs 12.8%; p=0.043). Secondary angiographic endpoints, including late lumen loss and net lumen gain, and 1-year clinical outcomes were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In de novo non-left main CBL treatment, MV stenting accompanied by SB dilation with the sirolimus DCB was non-inferior to the paclitaxel DCB.

Coronary Artery Dissection in Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty: Incidence, Predictors, and Clinical Outcomes

Coronary dissection is a potential occurrence after lesion preparation for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Unlike stents, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) do not allow to cover dissections, thus demanding an assessment of their safety in this setting. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and clinical outcomes of dissections occurring with DCB-based PCI for de novo coronary artery disease. Consecutive patients with de novo coronary artery disease who underwent PCI with intention-to-treat DCB angioplasty, with or without stent implantation, were retrospectively enrolled between 2018 and 2022 at 2 Italian centers. The decision whether to leave a dissection untreated or to proceed with bail-out stenting was based on a combined angiographic evaluation of Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow, residual minimal lumen diameter, and persistent extraluminal contrast hang-up. The primary end point at 2-year follow-up was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Among 522 DCB-treated lesions (466 patients), dissections were angiographically evident in 39.1% of cases, with 21.1% which underwent bail-out stenting and 78.9% left untreated. The incidence of bail-out stenting increased from type A to type E dissections (p for trend <0.001). Left anterior descending artery involvement (odds ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.39) was the strongest risk factors for dissection. Target lesion failure at 2 years occurred in 2.7% of lesions with untreated dissection compared with 4.2% of those with no dissection (log-rank p = 0.324). In conclusion, coronary dissections often complicate PCI with DCB angioplasty but do not correlate with increased risk of adverse events at midterm follow-up.

Predictors and Long-Term Prognostic Significance of Bailout Stenting During Percutaneous Coronary Interventions With Sirolimus-Coated Balloon: A Subanalysis of the Eastbourne Study

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloon (DCB) has been expanding progressively in recent years. Convincing evidence demonstrated the ability of some DCB to promote positive vessel remodeling, with potential clinical benefits at follow-up. When PCI with DCB results in suboptimal angiographic results (residual stenosis >30% or type C to F dissection), bailout stenting (BS) implantation is recommended to mitigate the risk of abrupt vessel occlusion or restenosis. However, clinical studies focusing on BS during PCI with DCB are scarce. This study aimed to compare the 2-year clinical outcomes of patients requiring BS with those who underwent sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB)-only PCI and investigate clinical and angiographic predictors of BS. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the prospective, multicenter, thE All-comers Sirolimus-coaTed BallOon eURopeaN rEgistry (EASTBOURNE) study. The overall cohort was stratified into 2 study groups: patients requiring BS versus those who underwent SCB-only PCI. The primary end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at the 24-month follow-up. Propensity score matching was used to balance clinical and procedural characteristics between the 2 study groups. The study population included 2,084 patients for a total of 2,318 treated lesions. Of them, 181 (7.8%) required BS for suboptimal results during PCI with SCB. Coronary lesions requiring BS were more frequently de novo stenoses (p = 0.016), longer (p = 0.012), and had a smaller median reference vessel diameter (p <0.001). At 24 months, TLR occurred in 133 (6.4%) patients. The 2 study groups experienced a similar rate of TLR in the unmatched cohort (6.3% in the SCB-only group vs 7.3% in the BS group, p = 0.683) and after propensity score matching analysis (4.2% in the SCB-only group vs 8.5% in the BS group, p = 0.223). These results were consistent when considering subpopulations with de novo lesions, in-stent restenosis, and large and small vessel disease. Revascularization of de novo lesions and smoking habit were independent positive predictors of BS, whereas the SCB inflation time was an independent negative predictor of BS by multivariable logistic analysis in the overall population. In contrast, we did not record any case of vessel thrombosis during follow-up. In conclusion, BS was associated with similar 2-year outcomes compared with SCB-only PCI and, thus, appear to be a safe bailout strategy for suboptimal angiographic results after DCB angioplasty.

Efficacy and Safety of Sirolimus-Coated Balloon Angioplasty in De Novo Lesions in Large Coronary Vessels: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Evidence regarding drug-coated balloon (DCB)-only angioplasty in de novo lesions of large vessels is still limited and mainly focused on paclitaxel-coated balloon. We aimed to analyze the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB)-only angioplasty in de novo lesions in large vessels compared to drug-eluting stent (DES).

METHODS

In this retrospective, dual-center, case-control study, we enrolled all consecutive patients treated between January 2022 and January 2024 with SCB-only angioplasty in de novo lesion in large vessel (> 2.75 mm) compared to a propensity-score matched contemporary population treated with DES. The primary endpoint was the rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR), while secondary endpoints were cardiac death (CD), target vessel revascularization (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of them.

RESULTS

The mean age was 70.1 ± 9.8 years in the SCB group (n = 92) and 67.9 ± 9.6 years in the DES group (n = 92) (p = 0.76). The median follow-up was 19.5 ± 12 months in the SCB group and 20.1 ± 13.1 months in the DES group (p = 0.47). TLR occurred in 6.7% of patients in the SCB group and 5.6% in the DES group (p = 0.75). The incidence of MI, TVR, and TLF were similar between the two groups (4.3% vs 3.3%, p = 0.7, 2.2% vs 3.4%, p = 0.65% and 9.8% vs 8.7%, p = 0.79). CD occurred in 4.3% in the SCB group, compared to 3.3% in the DES group (p = 0.70).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that SCB angioplasty is both safe and effective in the treatment of de novo lesions of large vessels compared with DES.

Drug-Coated Balloons for the Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease: A Review

Importance

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has emerged as an alternative to drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) as well as de novo coronary artery disease.

Observations

DCBs are balloons coated with antiproliferative agents and excipients, whose aim is to foster favorable vessel healing after appropriate lesion preparation. By providing homogeneous antiproliferative drug delivery in the absence of permanent foreign body implantation, DCBs offer multiple advantages over DES, including preservation of vessel anatomy and function and positive vessel remodeling. As such, DCBs have become appealing for treatment of ISR, small-vessel disease, long lesions, simplification of bifurcation procedures, and treatment of diffuse distal disease after recanalization of chronic total occlusions. In addition, patients with high bleeding risk, diabetes, and acute coronary syndrome might also stand to benefit from DCB angioplasty.

Conclusions and Relevance

Although commercially available in numerous countries now for more than a decade, DCB only recently obtained US Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of coronary ISR. Moreover, preliminary results from newer generation devices tested in different clinical scenarios have raised the interest of the international community. Accordingly, an up-to-date review is timely particularly with the anticipated wave of research on the matter. Herein, this review encompasses DCB technologies, their worldwide usage, details on relevant indications, and key procedural aspects of DCB angioplasty.

Application of Drug-Coated Balloons in Complex High Risk and Indicated Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

There is a growing trend of patients with significant comorbidities among those referred for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Consequently, the number of patients undergoing complex high risk indicated PCI (CHIP) is rising. CHIP patients frequently present with factors predisposing to extensive drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, such as bifurcation and/or heavily calcified coronary lesions, which exposes them to the risks associated with an increased stent burden. The drug-coated balloon (DCB) may overcome some of the limitations of DES, either through a hybrid strategy (DCB and DES combined) or as a leave-nothing-behind strategy (DCB-only). As such, there is a growing interest in extending the application of DCB to the CHIP population. The present review provides an outline of the available evidence on DCB use in CHIP patients, which comprise the elderly, comorbid, and patients with complex coronary anatomy. Although the majority of available data are observational, most studies support a lower threshold for the use of DCBs, particularly when multiple CHIP factors coexist within a single patient. In patients with comorbidities which predispose to bleeding events (such as increasing age, diabetes mellitus, and hemodialysis) DCBs may encourage shorter dual antiplatelet therapy duration-although randomized trials are currently lacking. Further, DCBs may simplify PCI in bifurcation lesions and chronic total coronary occlusions by reducing total stent length, and allow for late lumen enlargement when used in a hybrid fashion. In conclusion, DCBs pose a viable therapeutic option in CHIP patients, either as a complement to DES or as stand-alone therapy in selected cases.

Sirolimus-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent for complex coronary lesions. A propensity matched comparison

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in complex coronary artery disease (CAD) has been established as the standard of care, but stent-related events are not uncommon. Sirolimus-Coated Balloon (SCB)-based angioplasty is an emerging technology, although it needs to be thoroughly evaluated compared with DES in the complex PCI setting. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of SCB-based angioplasty compared with new-generation DES in complex PCI.

METHODS

Net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE: all-cause death, target lesion revascularization, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and major bleedings according to BARC classification), as a primary study endpoint was compared between SCB and new-generation DES for complex coronary lesions.

RESULTS

Among 1782 patients with complex CAD, 1076 were treated with a sirolimus-coated balloon (EASTBOURNE Registry) and 706 with new-generation DES (COMPLEX Registry). After propensity score matching, a total of 512 patients in both groups were analyzed. NACE occurred more significantly in the DES group during the 1-year follow-up (10.5% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.003), mainly due to a higher risk of bleeding (6.6% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.001). The Cox model adjusted for lesion length showed a significantly lower hazard of NACE (HR: 0.23, CI [0.10, 0.52], p < 0.001) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.07, CI [0.01, 0.66], p = 0.020) in SCB compared to DES group.

CONCLUSIONS

SCB angioplasty has an advantage over DES for the treatment of complex CAD regarding NACE, significantly reducing the incidence of major bleeding without increasing ischemic endpoints. SCB may be an alternative to DES in selected patients with complex coronary lesions.

Use of sirolimus-coated balloon in de novo coronary lesions; long-term clinical outcomes from a multi-center real-world population

BACKGROUND

Sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB), a relatively novel technology appears attractive due to the drug properties (safety and efficacy) and sirolimus remains the drug of choice in stents. However, there is limited data long-term data on SCB. In this study, we have explored the clinical outcomes following the use of SCB in de-novo lesions from a real-world practice.

AIMS

To report long-term clinical outcomes following the use of Siroliumus coated balloon in de novo lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analyzed all patients treated with an SCB in de novo lesions between 2016 and 2023 at four high-volume centers in UK and Italy. The outcomes measured included cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), target lesion revascularization (TLR) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). During the study period, 771 patients had SCB in de novo lesions. Diabetes mellitus was noted in 36% of patients (n = 280), of which 14% (n = 108) were insulin dependent. Fifteen percent (n = 117) had chronic kidney disease, Fifty-two percent (n = 398) of cases were in the setting acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and of which 51 cases (7%) were ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Small vessels (<3.0 mm) accounted for 78% (n = 601) of cases and 76% (n = 584) were long lesions (≥ 20 mm). The mean diameter of SCB was 2.6 ± 0.4 mm and the mean length was 25 ± 10.39 mm. Bailout stenting following SCB was required in 9% lesions (n = 67). During the median follow-up 640 days, total death occurred in 39 (5%) patients and of which, cardiac death occurred in 10 patients (1.3%). TVMI occurred in 20 patients (2.6%). TLR and TVR were 5.6% and 5.8% respectively. The overall MACE rate was 8%. We had no documented case of acute vessel closure.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this long-term follow-up in a real-world population are encouraging with low rates of hard endpoints and acceptable rates of TLR and MACE despite a complex group of patients. Our data suggest that SCBs are safe in coronary intervention with good clinical outcomes in the long term.

Long-Term Outcomes Following Sirolimus-Coated Balloon or Drug-Eluting Stents for Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that drug-coated balloons may benefit in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment. However, the efficacy of new-generation sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) compared with the latest generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) has not been studied in this setting.

METHODS

All patients in the EASTBORNE (The All-Comers Sirolimus-Coated Balloon European Registry) and DEB-DRAGON (DEB vs Thin-DES in DES-ISR: Long Term Outcomes) registries undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for DES-ISR were included in the study. The primary study end point was target lesion revascularization at 24 months. Secondary end points were major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 24 months. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCB versus thin-struts DES in ISR at long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 1545 patients with 1679 ISR lesions were included in the pooled analysis, of whom 621 (40.2%) patients with 621 lesions were treated with thin-strut DES and 924 (59.8%) patients with 1045 lesions were treated with SCB. The unmatched cohort showed no differences in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (10.8% versus 11.8%; P=0.568); however, there was a trend toward lower rates of myocardial infarction (7.4% versus 5.0%; P=0.062) and major adverse cardiovascular events (20.8% versus 17.1%; P=0.072) in the SCB group. After propensity score matching (n=335 patients per group), there were no significant differences in the rates of target lesion revascularization (11.6% versus 11.8%; P=0.329), target vessel revascularization (14.0% versus 13.1%; P=0.822), myocardial infarction (7.2% versus 4.5%; P=0.186), all-cause death (5.7% versus 4.2%; P=0.476), and major adverse cardiovascular event (21.5% versus 17.6%; P=0.242) between DES and SCB treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ISR, angioplasty with SCB compared with thin-struts DES is associated with comparable rates of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, all-cause death, and major adverse cardiovascular events at 2 years.

Drug-Coated Balloon Treatment for De Novo Coronary Lesions: Current Status and Future Perspectives

The outstanding development in contemporary medicine, highlighted by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), was achieved through the adoption of drug-eluting stents (DESs). Although DES is the established therapy for patients undergoing PCI for de novo coronary artery disease (CAD), their drawbacks include restenosis, stent thrombosis, and the requirement for dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with an uncertain duration regarding its optimality. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment leaves nothing behind on the vessel wall, providing the benefit of avoiding stent thrombosis and not necessitating obligatory extended DAPT. After optimizing coronary blood flow, DCB treatment delivers an anti-proliferative drug directly coated on a balloon. Although more evidence is needed for the application of DCB treatment in de novo coronary lesions, recent studies suggest the safety and effectiveness of DCB treatment for diverse conditions including small and large vessel diseases, complex lesions like bifurcation lesions or diffuse or multivessel diseases, chronic total occlusion lesions, acute myocardial infarctions, patients at high risk of bleeding, and beyond. Consequently, we will review the current therapeutic choices for managing de novo CAD using DCB and assess the evidence supporting their concurrent application. Additionally, it aims to discuss future important perspectives.

Magic Touch sirolimus-coated balloon: animal and clinical evidence of a coronary sirolimus drug-coated balloon

The Magic Touch sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) was recently introduced in Europe and features robust clinical technology different from other devices on the market. This device is able to deliver a sufficient sirolimus dose to the target segment to reduce neointimal proliferation with very little exposure downstream and no apparent adverse effects at sustained high drug concentrations. The SCB represents a promising novelty within the drug-coated balloon arena due to its mid-term efficacy and safety in the treatment of coronary artery disease, especially in de novo and small-vessel coronary lesions. The purpose of this article is to provide an up-to-date overview of the currently available animal and clinical trial results, as well as to highlight ongoing trials on the Magic Touch SCB.

The role of drug-coated balloons for coronary bifurcation management: results from the prospective EASTBOURNE-BIF study

BACKGROUND

Coronary bifurcation lesions are associated with less favourable outcome as compared to other lesion subsets. The role of drug-coated balloons (DCB) for bifurcation lesions has been only investigated in small studies so far, which reported encouraging results. We here describe the results of EASTBOURNE-BIF prospective registry, in which a sirolimus-DCB was used for the treatment of bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

Overall, 194 patients with bifurcations lesions identified in the EASTBOURNE study (Medina 1.1.1/1.1.0/1.0.1/0.1.1/0.1.0) were compared with 1049 patients with de-novo lesions from the same registry. Both a blended-strategy using a drug-eluting stent in the main branch and a DCB in the side branch as well as a full-DCB approach were used in the treatment of bifurcation lesions.

RESULTS

At one year of follow-up the study primary endpoint, target-lesion revascularization occurred at a similar rate in the bifurcation group versus the de-novo group (4.2 vs. 2%, P=0.28). Similar outcomes were observed in terms of all-cause death (3.3 vs. 1.4%, P=0.138), major adverse cardiovascular events (8.8 vs. 5.2%, P=0.081) and the rate of spontaneous myocardial infarction (2.8 vs. 1.0%, P=0.117).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of EASTBOURNE-BIF study show how the use of this DCB alone or in combination with drug eluting stents could represent a safe and effective alternative to stents for the treatment of bifurcations.

Drug-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent for treating de novo large vessel coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 studies involving 2888 patients

INTRODUCTION

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an established treatment option for in-stent restenosis and small vessel, de novo, coronary artery disease (CAD). Although the use of this tool is increasing in everyday practice, data regarding performance in the treatment of de novo, large vessel CAD (LV-CAD) is still lacking. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DCB versus drug-eluting stent (DES) in this setting.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases up to January 24, 2024, for studies which compared the efficacy and safety of DCB versus DES in the treatment of de novo lesions in large vessels (≥ 2.5 mm), reporting at least one clinical outcome of interest (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023470417). The analyzed outcomes were cardiovascular death (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), all-cause death (ACD), and late lumen loss (LLL) at follow-up. The effect size was estimated using a random effects model as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies (6 randomized controlled trials and 7 observational studies) involving 2888 patients (DCB n = 1334; DES n = 1533) with de novo LV-CAD were included in this meta-analysis following our inclusion criteria. No differences were observed between DCB and DES in terms of CVD (RR 0.49; 95% CI [0.23-1.03]; p = 0.06), MI (RR 0.48; 95% CI [0.16-1.45]; p = 0.89), TLR (RR 0.73; 95% CI [0.40-1.34]; p = 0.32), ACD (RR 0.78; 95% CI [0.57-1.07]; p = 0.12), and LLL (MD - 0.14; 95% CI [- 0.30 to 0.02]; p = 0.10) at follow-up. DES proved a higher mean acute gain versus DCB [1.94 (1.73, 2.14) vs 1.31 (1.02, 1.60); p = 0.0006].

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis showed that DCB PCI might provide a promising option for the management of selected, de novo LV-CAD compared to DES. However, more focused RCTs are needed to further prove the benefits of a "metal-free" strategy in this subset of CAD.

Sirolimus-coated balloon in acute and chronic coronary syndromes: the PEACE study, a subanalysis of the EASTBOURNE registry

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The PEACE study (Performance of a sirolimus-eluting balloon strategy in acute and chronic coronary syndromes) investigated for the first time whether a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) (Magic Touch, Concept Medical, India) is associated with different outcomes depending on whether it is used in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or chronic coronary syndromes (CCS).

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis from the all-comers EASTBOURNE Registry (NCT03085823). Out of 2083 patients enrolled, an SCB was used to treat 968 (46.5%) ACS and 1115 (53.5%) CCS patients. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization at 12 months, while secondary endpoints were angiographic success and major adverse cardiovascular events.

RESULTS

Baseline demographics, mean reference vessel diameter and mean lesion length were comparable between ACS and CCS. Predilatation was more commonly performed in ACS (P=.007). SCB was inflated at a standard pressure in both groups with a slight trend toward longer inflation time in ACS. Angiographic success was high in both groups (ACS 97.4% vs CCS 97.7%, P=.820) with limited bailout stenting. Similarly, at 12 months the cumulative incidence of target lesion revascularization (ACS 6.6% vs CCS 5.2%, P=.258) was comparable between ACS and CCS. Conversely, a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events in acute presenters was mainly driven by myocardial infarction recurrencies (ACS 10.4% vs CCS 8.3%, P=.009). In-stent restenosis showed a higher proportion of target lesion revascularization and major adverse cardiovascular events than de novo lesions, independently of the type of presentation at the index procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

This SCB shows good performance in terms of acute and 1-year outcomes independently of the clinical presentation.

Drug-Coated Balloon in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Ready for the Prime Time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are a major global health concern. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) has been endorsed as safe and effective in the management of culprit and non-culprit lesions of ACS. However, permanent metallic implants may have drawbacks, including the need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and the risk of long-term stent-related complications. An alternative approach using drug-coated balloons (DCBs) is gaining growing interest, having the potential of delivering therapy directly to vulnerable plaques, avoiding the need for permanent metallic implants, and potentially allowing for better long-term medical treatment. Despite limited evidence, DCB is being explored in several patients' subgroups. This review aims to discuss the existing evidence regarding DCB in ACS management.

RECENT FINDINGS

DCB appears to be a promising strategy in the management of ACS, showing comparable angiographic and clinical results as compared to new-generation DES in relatively small clinical trials or large prospective registries. The advantage of avoiding permanent implants is particularly appealing in this setting, where DCB has the potential of delivering anti-atherogenic local therapy directly to vulnerable plaques still amenable to atherogenic regression. This review seeks to underline the theoretical background of DCB use and reports the available evidence in its support in the specific setting of ACS. In the context of ACS, the use of DCB is highly attractive, offering a dedicated anti-atherogenic local therapy, capable of addressing a broad range of vulnerable plaques and patients.

Long term clinical outcome of sirolimus drug coated balloons in large coronary vessels

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of drug coating balloons (DCB) for the treatment of lesions in large coronary vessel are limited.

AIMS

Our study aimed to evaluate the performance of a sirolimus DCB in large coronary arteries.

METHODS

We analyzed all the procedures included in the EASTBOURNE Registry (NCT03085823) enrolling patients with a clinical indication to percutaneous coronary intervention performed by a sirolimus DCB according to investigator judgment. In the present analysis, a cut-off of 2.75 mm was used to define large coronary arteries. Primary endpoint of the study was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 24 months whereas secondary endpoint included procedural success, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death and total mortality.

RESULTS

Among the 2123 patients and 2440 lesions enrolled in the EASTBOURNE study between 2016 and 2020, 757 patients/810 lesions fulfilled the criteria for the present analysis. Mean reference vessel diameter was 3.2 ± 0.3 mm with mean lesion length of 22 ± 7 mm. Procedural success was high (96%) and at 2-year follow up the device showed a good efficacy with a TLR rate of 9%. There were 34 deaths (4.5%), 30 MIs (4%) and 8 BARC type 3-5 bleedings (1.1%). In-stent restenosis (629 lesions) and de novo lesions (181) were associated with 11% and 4% rates of TLR at 2 years, respectively (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical performance of a sirolimus DCB in large coronary artery vessels shows promising signals at 2-year follow up, both in de novo and in-stent restenosis lesions.

Treatment of coronary lesions with a novel crystalline sirolimus-coated balloon

Background

There is mounting data supporting the use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) not only for treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR), but also in native coronary artery disease. So far, paclitaxel-coated balloons represented the mainstay DCBs. The SeQuent® crystalline sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) (B.Braun Medical Inc, Germany) represents a novel DCB, which allows a sustained release of the limus-drug. We evaluated its performance in an all-comer cohort, including complex coronary lesions.

Methods

Consecutive patients treated with the SeQuent® SCB were analyzed from the prospective SIROOP registry (NCT04988685). We assessed clinical outcomes, including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and cardiovascular death. Angiograms and outcomes were independently adjudicated.

Results

From March 2021 to March 2023, we enrolled 126 patients and lesions, of which 100 (79%) treated using a "DCB-only" strategy and 26 (21%) with a hybrid approach (DES + DCB). The mean age was 68 ± 10 years, 48 (38%) patients had an acute coronary syndrome. Regarding lesion characteristics, ISR was treated in 27 (21%), 11 (9%) underwent CTO-PCI and 59 (47%) of the vessels were moderate to severe calcified. Procedural success rate was 100%. At a median follow-up time of 12.7 (IQR 12; 14.2) months, MACE occurred in 5 patients (4.3%). No acute vessel closure was observed.

Conclusions

Our data indicates promising outcomes following treatment with this novel crystalline SCB in an all-comer cohort with complex coronary lesions. These results require further investigation with randomized trials.

A 2024 scientific update on the clinical performance of drug-coated balloons

Continuous advances in the field of interventional cardiology have led to the development of drug-coated balloons (DCB). These represent a promising device for overcoming the well-known limitations of traditional metallic stents, which are associated with a persistent yearly increased risk of adverse events. This technology has the ability to homogeneously transfer the drug into the vessel wall in the absence of a permanent prosthesis implanted in the coronary vessel. Robust data support the use of DCB for the treatment of in-stent restenosis, but there is also currently growing evidence from long-term follow-up of large randomised clinical trials regarding the use of these devices in other scenarios, such as de novo small and large vessel disease, complex bifurcations, and diffuse coronary disease. Other critical clinical settings such as diabetes mellitus, high bleeding risk patients and acute coronary syndromes could be approached in the upcoming future by using DCB, alone or as part of a blended strategy in combination with drug-eluting stents. There have been important scientific and technical advances in the DCB field in recent years. The purpose of this paper is to review the most current data regarding the use of DCB, including the mid- and long-term follow-up reports on the safety and efficacy of this novel strategy in different clinical and angiographic scenarios.

The evolution and revolution of drug coated balloons in coronary angioplasty: An up-to-date review of literature data

European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines gave class I A indication for use of DCB in in-stent restenosis. However, no indication exists for the usage of DCB in de novo lesions. Although the current generation DES offer excellent results, as we embark more complex lesions such as calcified lesion and chronic total occlusion, restenosis and stent thrombosis are higher and tend to increase within the years. There is increasing desire to leave nothing behind to abolish the risk of restenosis and stent thrombosis and hence the absorbable scaffolds were introduced, but with disappointing results. In addition, they take several years to be absorbed. Drug coated balloons offer an alternative to stents with no permanent implant of metal or polymer. They are already in use in in Europe and Asia and they have been approved for the first time in the United States for clinical trials specifically for restenotic lesions. There is emerging data in de novo lesions which have shown that DCB are noninferior and in some studies maybe even superior to current generation DES especially in small vessels. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on this expanding technology focussing on the evidence in both re-stenotic and de novo lesions.

The fate of coronary dissections left after sirolimus-coated balloon angioplasty: A prespecified subanalysis of the EASTBOURNE study

OBJECTIVES

We sought to understand the clinical outcomes of dissections left untreated after sirolimus drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty.

BACKGROUND

DCB may be a valuable alternative to stents for the treatment of native coronary lesions, but the risk of having a dissection after DCB-angioplasty is not negligible. While type A and B dissections can be safely treated conservatively, some debate exists regarding type C dissections. We previously showed the safety of dissections left untreated after second-generation paclitaxel-DCB. However, the fate of dissections after sirolimus-DCB angioplasty has not been investigated so far.

METHODS

EASTBOURNE is a prospective, multicenter, international, investigator-driven study aiming to explore the safety and efficacy of a novel sirolimus-DCB. This study enrolled a consecutive, all-comer population of coronary artery disease patients and is the largest prospective study on DCB so far. Primary endpoints of the study, target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and other clinical endpoints at 12 months, have been presented elsewhere. This is a prespecified subgroup analysis of the patients left with not-flow limiting dissection after DCB angioplasty, with complete 12 months follow-up and comparison between patients left with a dissection versus patients with DCB used for de novo lesions.

RESULTS

Between September 2016 and November 2020, a total of 2123 patients were enrolled at 38 study centers. Seventy-three patients were left with nonflow limiting dissections (43 type A, 27 type B, 3 type C) and underwent complete 1-year clinical follow-up. In the nondissection group, 1110 patients had de-novo coronary artery disease while 900 had in-stent restenosis. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, while the dissection group was associated with longer lesions (23.8 vs. 18.4 mm, p < 0.001) and more frequent use of predilation (100 vs. 91.4%, p = 0.016). At 12-month follow-up, no significant differences among the groups were found, with a total of 1.25% TLR in the dissection cohort versus 5.6% in the de-novo cohort (p = 0.13), and an overall rate of major adverse cardiovascular events of 4.4% versus 10.1% (p = 0.18). Total death (1.5 vs. 2.6, p = 0.87), cardiac death, myocardial infarction (0% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.35), and bleedings did not differ significantly among the groups as well.

CONCLUSIONS

In this subgroup analysis of the EASTBOURNE study of consecutive patients treated with new-generation sirolimus DCB, dissections left untreated after angioplasty did not lead to an increase in adverse events.