Comparisons of drug-eluting balloon versus drug-eluting stent for the treatment of cancer patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for cancer patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains challenging. The objective of the study was to investigate the safety and efficiency of drug eluting balloon (DEB) versus drug eluting stent (DES) in this high-risk group. METHODS: Between 1st January 2017 and 1st January 2022, cancer patients admitted to Beijing Chaoyang Hospital with AMI were retrospectively enrolled. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). The secondary endpoints included major bleeding events, heart failure and cardiac complications. RESULTS: A total of 164 cancer patients presenting with AMI were included in the final analysis. Patients treated with DEB had a numerically lower rate of MACE than those treated with DES during a median follow-up of 21.8 months (22.9% vs. 37.1%, p = 0.23). Patients treated with DEB had a trend towards lower rate of major bleeding events than patients treated with DES (6.3% vs. 18.1%, HR 2.96, 95% CI [0.88, 9.92], p = 0.08). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regards to the rate of heart failure (4.2% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.32) and cardiac complications (0.0% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that in cancer patients with AMI, DEB had a trend towards lower rate of major bleeding events and a numerically lower rate of MACE compared with DES.

Comparisons of Drug-Eluting Balloon versus Drug-Eluting Stent in the Treatment of Young Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the younger population has been increasing gradually in recent years. The objective of the present study is to investigate the safety and effectiveness of drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) in young patients with AMI. METHODS: All consecutive patients with AMI aged ≤ 45 years were retrospectively enrolled. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary study endpoints included heart failure and major bleeding events. RESULTS: A total of 276 young patients presenting with AMI were finally included. The median follow-up period was 1155 days. Patients treated with DEBs had a trend toward a lower incidence of DOCEs (3.0% vs. 11.0%, p = 0.12) mainly driven by the need for TLR (3.0% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.19) than those treated with DESs. No significant differences between the two groups were detected in the occurrence of cardiac death (0.0% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.69), MI (0.0% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.40), heart failure (0.0% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.39), or major bleeding events (1.5% vs 4.8%, p = 0.30). Multivariate regression analysis showed that DEBs were associated with a trend toward a lower risk of DOCEs (HR 0.13, 95% CI [0.02, 1.05], p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the present study suggested that DEBs might be a potential treatment option in young patients with AMI. A larger scale, randomized, multicenter study is required to investigate the safety and effectiveness of DEBs in this setting.