CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small-Vessel Disease: The RESTORE SVD China Randomized Trial Association between Coronary Collaterals and Myocardial Viability in Patients with a Chronic Total Occlusion Utility and Challenges of an Early Invasive Strategy in Patients Resuscitated From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Empagliflozin and Progression of Kidney Disease in Type 2 Diabetes Frequency, predictors, and prognosis of ejection fraction improvement in heart failure: an echocardiogram-based registry study Current Smoking and Prognosis After Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: New Pathophysiological Insights Endocardium Minimally Contributes to Coronary Endothelium in the Embryonic Ventricular Free Walls Comparison of Benefit of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Patients With Versus Without Reduced (≤40%) Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Clinical Trial2018 Dec 10;11(23):2381-2392.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small-Vessel Disease: The RESTORE SVD China Randomized Trial

Tang Y, Qiao S, RESTORE SVD China Investigators. Keywords: drug-coated balloon; drug-eluting stent(s); percentage diameter stenosis; small-vessel disease

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to evaluate the angiographic efficacy and clinical outcomes of the Restore paclitaxel-coated balloon in a randomized trial designed to enable its approval with an indication for small-vessel disease (SVD).

 

BACKGROUND - Higher rates of restenosis and stent thrombosis limit the effectiveness of drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment of SVD. Whether a drug-coated balloon (DCB)-only strategy is effective in de novo SVD is not yet established.

 

METHODS - In the noninferiority RESTORE SVD China trial, eligible patients with reference vessel diameter 2.25 and 2.75 mm were randomized to the Restore DCB or the RESOLUTE Integrity DES in a 1 : 1 ratio stratified by diabetes and number of lesions treated. Patients with RVD 2.00 and <2.25 mm were enrolled in a nested very small vessel registry. Angiographic and clinical follow-up were planned at 9 months and 1 year, respectively, in all patients. The study was powered for the primary endpoint of 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis.

 

RESULTS - Between August 2016 and June 2017, a total of 230 subjects at 12 sites were randomized to the DCB group (n = 116) or DES group (n = 114); 32 patients were treated with the DCB in the very small vessel cohort. Nine-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis was 29.6 ± 2.0% with the DCB versus 24.1 ± 2.0% with the DES; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 10.9%, achieving noninferiority of the DCB compared with the DES (p for noninferiority < 0.001). The DCB and DES had comparable 1-year rates of target lesion failure (4.4% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.72).

 

CONCLUSIONS - In this multicenter randomized trial, the Restore DCB was noninferior to the RESOLUTE DES for 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis. (Assess the Efficacy and Safety of RESTORE Paclitaxel Eluting Balloon Versus RESOLUTE Zotarolimus Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Small Coronary Vessel Disease; NCT02946307).

 

Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.