CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloon for the treatment of drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis: A randomized RESTORE trial Benefit-risk profile of extended dual antiplatelet therapy beyond 1 year in patients with high risk of ischemic or bleeding events after PCI Meta-Analysis of Death and Myocardial Infarction in the DEFINE-FLAIR and iFR-SWEDEHEART Trials Consensus standards for acquisition, measurement, and reporting of intravascular optical coherence tomography studies: a report from the International Working Group for Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Standardization and Validation Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing Bifurcation Techniques for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention A Case of Pulmonary Hypertension Associated with Idiopathic Hypereosinophilic Syndrome Use of clopidogrel with or without aspirin in patients taking oral anticoagulant therapy and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an open-label, randomised, controlled trial Difference in basic concept of coronary bifurcation intervention between Korea and Japan. Insight from questionnaire in experts of Korean and Japanese bifurcation clubs

Original Research2018 Mar;197:35-42.

JOURNAL:Am Heart J. Article Link

Comparison of drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloon for the treatment of drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis: A randomized RESTORE trial

Wong YTA, Kang DY, Park DW et al. Keywords: drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis; drug-coated balloon

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - This study sought to evaluate the optimal treatment for in-stent restenosis (ISR) of drug-eluting stents (DESs).


METHODS - This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized study comparing the use of drug-eluting balloon (DEB) versus second-generation everolimus-eluting stent for the treatment of DES ISR. The primary end point was in-segment late loss at 9-month routine angiographic follow-up.

RESULTS - A total of 172 patients were enrolled, and 74 (43.0%) patients underwent the angiographic follow-up. The primary end point was not different between the 2 treatment groups (DEB group 0.15±0.49 mm vs DES group 0.19±0.41 mm, P=.54). The secondary end points of in-segment minimal luminal diameter (MLD) (1.80±0.69 mm vs 2.09±0.46 mm, P=.03), in-stent MLD (1.90±0.71 mm vs 2.29±0.48 mm, P=.005), in-segment percent diameter stenosis (34%±21% vs 26%±15%, P=.05), and in-stent percent diameter stenosis (33%±21% vs 21%±15%, P=.002) were more favorable in the DES group. The composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization at 1 year was comparable between the 2 groups (DEB group 7.0% vs DES group 4.7%, P=.51).

CONCLUSIONS - Treatment of DES ISR using DEB or second-generation DES did not differ in terms of late loss at 9-month angiographic follow-up, whereas DES showed better angiographic results regarding minimal MLD and percent diameter stenosis. Both treatment strategies were safe and effective up to 1 year after the procedure.

Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.