CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Drug Coated Balloon

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of new-generation drug-eluting stents versus drug-coated balloon for in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Comparative efficacy of two paclitaxel-coated balloons with different excipient coatings in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis: A pooled analysis of the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Optimizing Treatment of Drug Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis 3 and 4 trials Outcomes after drug-coated balloon treatment for patients with calcified coronary lesions Long-term clinical outcomes after treatment of stent restenosis with two drug-coated balloons Contemporary use of drug-coated balloons in coronary artery disease: Where are we now? The SABRE Trial (Sirolimus Angioplasty Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis): Angiographic Results and 1-Year Clinical Outcomes Long-term outcomes after treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis with paclitaxel-coated balloon catheters or everolimus-eluting stents: 3-year follow-up of the TIS clinical study Therapeutic efficacy of paclitaxel-coated balloon for de novo coronary lesions with diameters larger than 2.8 mm

Original Research2018 Jul;30(7):256-261.

JOURNAL: Article Link

Treatment of Very Small De Novo Coronary Artery Disease With 2.0 mm Drug-Coated Balloons Showed 1-Year Clinical Outcome Comparable With 2.0 mm Drug-Eluting Stents

Sim HW, Ananthakrishna R, Loh JP et al. Keywords: drug-coated balloon; drug-eluting stent; target-lesion failure

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVE - To evaluate the 1-year clinical outcomes of patients treated with 2.0 mm drug-coated balloon (DCB) vs 2.0 mm drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in small-caliber vessel de novo coronary artery disease (CAD).


METHODS - All patients treated with 2.0 mm DCB or 2.0 mm DES for very small vessel de novo CAD from July 2014 to June 2016 were included in this study. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of target-lesion failure (TLF) and time to TLF, defined as a combination of cardiac mortality, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and target-lesion revascularization (TLR).


RESULTS - A total of 87 patients (96 lesions) were implanted with 2.0 mm DCBs and 200 patients (223 lesions) were implanted with 2.0 mm DESs during the study period. Mean reference vessel diameter was similar between the DCB and DES groups (1.88 ± 0.38 mm vs 1.95 ± 0.21 mm, respectively; P=.11). The 1-year TLF rates were 7.0% in the DCB group and 8.2% in the DES group (P=.73). TLF was driven by TLR in both groups. Bailout stenting was performed in 7 patients (8 lesions) who received a DCB. Stent thrombosis was seen in 4 patients (2.0%) who underwent DES implantation. There was no vessel thrombosis noted in the DCB group. Cardiogenic shock was identified as a direct and significant predictor for both the occurrence of TLF and time to TLF.


CONCLUSIONS - In this first report, treatment of very small vessel CAD with 2.0 mm DCB vs 2.0 mm DES was associated with similar 1-year TLF rates.