RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty seems a safe and effective option for specific de novo coronary lesions. However, the beneficial effect of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided DCB angioplasty in de novo lesions remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the benefits of IVUS guidance over angiography guidance during DCB angioplasty in de novo coronary lesions. METHODS: A total of 260 patients with high bleeding risk who had a de novo coronary lesion (reference vessel diameter 2.0-4.0 mm, and lesion length ≤15 mm) were randomly assigned to either an IVUS-guided or an angioplasty-guided DCB angioplasty group. The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 7 months after procedure. The secondary endpoint was target vessel failure at 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 2 patients in the angiography-guided group and 7 patients in the IVUS-guided group underwent bailout stent implantation (P = 0.172). The primary endpoint of 7-month LLL was 0.03 ± 0.52 mm with angiography guidance vs -0.10 ± 0.34 mm with IVUS guidance (mean difference 0.14 mm; 95% CI: 0.02-0.26; P = 0.025). IVUS guidance was also associated with a larger 7-month minimal lumen diameter (2.06 ± 0.62 mm vs 1.75 ± 0.63 mm; P < 0.001) and a smaller diameter stenosis (28.15% ± 13.88% vs 35.83% ± 17.69%; P = 0.001) compared with angiography guidance. Five target vessel failures occurred at 6 months, with 4 (3.1%) in the angiography-guided group and 1 (0.8%) in the IVUS-guided group (P = 0.370). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that IVUS-guided DCB angioplasty is associated with a lower LLL in patients with a de novo coronary lesion compared with angiography guidance. (Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiography Guided Drug-Coated Balloon [ULTIMATE-III]; NCT04255043).
RESUMO
As the first barrier of host defense, innate immunity sets up the parclose to keep out external microbial or virus attacks. Depending on the type of pathogens, several cytoplasm pattern recognition receptors exist to sense the attacks from either foreign or host origins, triggering the immune response to battle with the infections. Among them, cGAS-STING is the major pathway that mainly responds to microbial DNA, DNA virus infections, or self-DNA, which mainly comes from genome instability by-product or released DNA from the mitochondria. cGAS was initially found functional in the cytoplasm, although intriguing evidence indicates that cGAS exists in the nucleus where it is involved in the DNA damage repair process. Because the close connection between DNA damage response and immune response and cGAS recognizes DNA in length-dependent but DNA sequence-independent manners, it is urgent to clear the function balance of cGAS in the nucleus versus cytoplasm and how it is shielded from recognizing the host origin DNA. Here, we outline the current conception of immune response and the regulation mechanism of cGAS in the nucleus. Furthermore, we will shed light on the potential mechanisms that are restricted to be taken away from self-DNA recognition, especially how post-translational modification regulates cGAS functions.
