Comparative efficacy of drug-eluting balloon and drug-eluting stent for treatment of in-stent restenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of drug-eluting stents and drug-eluting balloons in treating in-stent restenosis. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted from January to February 2022, and comprised literature search on PubMed, ProQuest, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases with relevant key words to locate randomised controlled trials and observational studies published between 2000 and 2022 that compared drugeluting balloons and drug-eluting stents in the treatment of in-stent restenosis. The outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke and target vessel revascularisation. The pooled risk ratio for each outcome was analysed. Data was analysed using Review Manager 5.1. RESULTS: Of the 1,105 studies identified, 11(0.99%) were analysed in detail; 7(63.6%) randomised controlled trials and 4(36.4%) observational studies. There were 2,437 patients with in-stent restenosis. There was no significant difference between drug-eluting balloons and drugeluting stents with respect to all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction and major adverse cardiovascular events (p>0.05). Drug-eluting stents significantly caused more target vessel revascularisation compared to drugeluting balloons (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Except for target vessel revascularisation, the drug-eluting balloons and drug-eluting stents had no difference in terms of clinical outcomes related to in-stent restenosis patients.

Excimer laser coronary angioplasty combined with drug-coated balloon in the treatment of in-stent restenosis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to investigate the safety and efficacy of excimer laser coronary angioplasty (ELCA) combined with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR), and to explore whether the contrast injection technique would improve the neointimal tissue ablation of ELCA. METHODS: We studied patients diagnosed with ISR between January 2019 and October 2022 at two medical centers. These patients underwent DCB angioplasty guided by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Based on whether ELCA was performed before DCB treatment, patients were categorized into two groups: the ELCA + DCB group and the DCB group. All patients underwent clinical follow-up 1 year after the procedure. The primary endpoint was the 1-year rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR), which was defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or bypass surgery on the target vessel conducted to address restenosis or other complications related to the target lesion. The secondary endpoints including immediate luminal gain (ΔMLA, defined as the difference in minimum lumen area before and after the intervention). RESULTS: A total of 85 lesions in 75 patients were included. The mean age of the study population was 64.2 ± 12.0 years, with 81.3% male. Baseline clinical characteristics were well-balanced, and procedural success was 100% in both groups. The ELCA + DCB group (n = 24) exhibited a greater ΔMLA compared to the DCB group (n = 61) (3.57 ± 0.79 mm² vs. 2.50 ± 1.06 mm², [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.57-1.69], p < 0.001), The reduction in 1-year TLR was more frequently observed in patients from the ELCA + DCB group compared to the DCB group (hazard ratio 0.33 [95% CI: 0.11-0.99]; log-rank p = 0.048). The exploratory analysis showed that ELCA with contrast infusion is associated with greater acute lumen gain compared to ELCA with saline infusion (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ELCA and DCB is a safe and effective treatment strategy for in-stent stenosis. Additionally, compared with saline injection, ELCA with contrast injection is associated with greater acute lumen gain. However, the optimal contrast agent concentration and long-term outcome of the contrast injection technique need confirmation through larger sample sizes and prospective studies.

Drug-Coated Balloons in the Management of Coronary Artery Disease.

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are specialized coronary devices comprised of a semicompliant balloon catheter with an engineered coating that allows the delivery of antiproliferative agents locally to the vessel wall during percutaneous coronary intervention. Although DCBs were initially developed more than a decade ago, their potential in coronary interventions has recently sparked renewed interest, especially in the United States. Originally designed to overcome the limitations of conventional balloon angioplasty and stenting, they aim to match or even improve upon the outcomes of drug-eluting stents without leaving a permanent implant. Presently, in-stent restenosis is the condition with the most robust evidence supporting the use of DCBs. DCBs provide improved long-term vessel patency compared with conventional balloon angioplasty and may be comparable to drug-eluting stents without the need for an additional stent layer, supporting their use as a first-line therapy for in-stent restenosis. Beyond the treatment of in-stent restenosis, DCBs provide an additional tool for de novo lesions for a strategy that avoids a permanent metal scaffold, which may be especially useful for the management of technically challenging anatomies such as small vessels and bifurcations. DCBs might also be advantageous for patients with high bleeding risk due to the decreased necessity for extended antiplatelet therapy, and in patients with diabetes and patients with diffuse disease to minimize long-stented segments. Further studies are crucial to confirm these broader applications for DCBs and to further validate safety and efficacy.

In-Stent Restenosis Overview: From Intravascular Imaging to Optimal Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Management.

Despite ongoing progress in stent technology and deployment techniques, in-stent restenosis (ISR) still remains a major issue following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and accounts for 10.6% of all interventions in the United States. With the continuous rise in ISR risk factors such as obesity and diabetes, along with an increase in the treatment of complex lesions with high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (CHIP), a substantial growth in ISR burden is expected. This review aims to provide insight into the mechanisms, classification, and management of ISR, with a focus on exploring innovative approaches to tackle this complication comprehensively, along with a special section addressing the approach to complex calcified lesions.

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The AGENT IDE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States. Objective: To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants: AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure-defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death-was tested for superiority. Results: Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253.

Intrastent Restenosis: A Comprehensive Review.

The primary objective of this paper is to delineate and elucidate the contemporary advancements, developments, and prevailing trajectories concerning intrastent restenosis (ISR). We aim to provide a thorough overview of the most recent developments in this area, covering various aspects such as pathophysiological insights, therapeutic approaches, and new strategies for tackling the complex challenges of ISR in modern clinical settings. The authors have undertaken a study to address a relatively new medical challenge, recognizing its significant impact on the morbidity and mortality of individuals with cardiovascular diseases. This effort is driven by the need to fully understand, analyze, and possibly improve the outcomes of this emerging medical issue within the cardiovascular disease field. We acknowledge its considerable clinical implications and the necessity for innovative methods to mitigate its effects on patient outcomes. Therefore, our emphasis was directed towards elucidating the principal facets of the condition's prevalence, expounding upon the foundational mechanisms underscoring conspicuous restenosis, and delineating the risk factors relevant in shaping the contemporary landscape of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities. This thorough examination aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the various dimensions of the condition, including epidemiological data, pathophysiological complexities, and clinical considerations critical for evaluating and enhancing current diagnostic and treatment approaches.

Drug-Coated Balloons for Treatment of Internal Carotid Artery Restenosis After Stenting: A Single-Center Mid-Term Outcome Study.

PURPOSE: Endovascular and surgical treatments of stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) are common procedures, yet both introduce a risk of restenosis due to endothelial hyperplasia. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are designed to decrease neointimal hyperplasia, however rarely used in the neurovascular setting. This study retrospectively analyzes mid-term results of DCB-treated in-stent restenosis (ISR) of the ICA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical history, comorbidities, and periprocedural data of patients receiving DCB treatment for > 50% ISR of the ICA after carotid artery stenting were analyzed. Follow-up after DCB treatment was performed with Doppler ultrasound. Suspicious cases were checked with CT- or MR-angiography and-if there was agreement between the modalities-validated with digital subtraction angiography. Potential risk factors for restenosis and differences in outcomes after PTA with three types of DCB balloons were evaluated. RESULTS: DCB treatment was performed in 109 cases, 0.9% of which involved in-hospital major stroke; no minor strokes occurred. A total of 17 patients (15.6%) had recurrent ISR after DCB treatment, after a mean time of 30.2 months (7-85 months). Tobacco use was significantly associated with a higher incidence of recurrent ISR. CONCLUSION: DCB angioplasty for ISR is an effective treatment that may delay and decrease restenosis. Treating comorbidities and adopting lifestyle changes may additionally help prevent ISR.

A case of repeated in-stent restenosis of coronary artery as a primary manifestation of seronegative antiphospholipid antibody syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome (APS) is a multisystemic autoimmune disorder which affects many organs or systems; however, coronary artery is relatively less frequently involved. CASE PRESENTATION: A 65-year-old female with effort chest pain was hospitalized for unstable angina in Janurary, 2015. Coronary angiography revealed sub-total occlusion of proximal left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery, where a drug-eluting stent was successfully deployed. The patient experienced multiple in-stent stenosis at LAD coronary artery and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery was advised. Subsequently, severe stenosis of left circumflex (LCX) coronary artery emerged, and the patient suffered persistent in-stent restenosis. Eventually, the patient was diagnosed with seronegative antiphospholipid antibody syndrome and salvaged by immunosuppressants. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated in-stent restenosis could be a primary manifestation of seronegative antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, and suppression of autoimmune activity and inflammation other than purely coronary revascularization might be a better option.

Prognostic impact of in-stent restenosis in normal weight, overweight, and obese patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), in-stent restenosis (ISR) is related with a worse prognosis, while higher body mass index (BMI) values are associated with better outcomes. It is unclear whether the prognostic impact of ISR varies in function of BMI. METHODS: Patients undergoing PCI at a large center from 2012 to 2019 not presenting with an acute myocardial infarction (MI) were included. Subjects with BMI < 18.5 kg/m2 or treated with bare metal stents were excluded. Patients were stratified according to type of lesion treated (ISR vs. no-ISR) and into four BMI categories: normal weight (BMI 18.5-25 kg/m2 ), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2 ), class I obesity (30.0-34.9 kg/m2 ), class II-III obesity (≥35.0 kg/m2 ). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, MI, and target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 1 year. RESULTS: Out of 16,234 patients, 3694 (23%) underwent PCI for ISR. ISR as compared to no-ISR was associated with a consistent increased risk of MACE within the normal weight (18.8% vs. 7.8%, adj. hazard ratio (HR): 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51-2.64), overweight (19.1% vs. 6.4%, adj. HR: 2.35, 95% CI: 1.91-2.88), class I obesity (18.3% vs. 6.8%, adj. HR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.47-2.57), and class II-III obesity (16.4% vs. 7.4%, adj. HR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.09-2.37) groups (interaction p-value: 0.192). The ISR-related risks were mostly driven by an excess of TVR. CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, ISR was associated with an increased risk of MACE irrespective of BMI, mostly due to an excess of TVR after ISR.

One-year safety and effectiveness of the Agent paclitaxel-coated balloon for the treatment of small vessel disease and in-stent restenosis.

The Agent device consists of a semi-compliant balloon catheter, which is coated with a therapeutic low-dose formulation of paclitaxel (2 µg/mm2) blended with an inactive excipient acetyl-tri-n-butyl citrate (ATBC). AGENT Japan SV is a randomized controlled study that enrolled 150 patients from 14 Japanese sites treated with Agent or SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon. This study also includes a single-arm substudy evaluating the safety and effectiveness of Agent in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). Patients with a single de novo native lesion (lesion length ≤ 28 mm and reference diameter ≥ 2.00 to < 3.00 mm) were randomized 2:1 to receive either Agent (n = 101) or SeQuent Please (n = 49). The ISR substudy enrolled 30 patients with lesion length ≤ 28 mm and reference diameter ≥ 2.00 to ≤ 4.00 mm. In the SV RCT, target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year occurred in four patients treated with Agent (4.0%) versus one patient with SeQuent Please (2.0%; P = 1.00). None of the patients in either treatment arm died. There were no significant differences in the rates of myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization and target lesion thrombosis through 1 year. In the ISR substudy, the 1-year rates of TLF and target lesion thrombosis were 6.7% and 0.0%, respectively. These data support the safety and effectiveness of the Agent paclitaxel-coated balloon in patients with small vessels and ISR.

Treatment of In-stent Restenosis of the Internal Carotid Artery Using Drug-eluting Balloons.

PURPOSE: In-stent restenosis (ISR) following internal carotid artery (ICA) stenting is relatively common with an estimated incidence of 5%. Treatment options include repeat angioplasty with conventional or drug-eluting balloons (DEB), repeat stent angioplasty and surgical intervention. Application of DEB in ISR of the coronary and peripheral arteries is an established method; however, data on DEB treatment of ICA ISR are sparse. In this work, results from a retrospective cohort of 45 patients harboring 46 ICA ISR lesions treated with DEB angioplasty are presented. METHODS: Clinical, procedural and imaging data from DEB angioplasty treatment of 46 high-grade ICA ISR lesions in 45 patients, performed between 2013 and 2021 were collected. A single type of DEB (Elutax, Aachen Resonance, Aachen, Germany) was used in all procedures. Imaging follow-up was performed by regular Doppler ultrasound (DUS), verified by computed tomography angiography (CTA) in cases suspicious for a recurrent ISR. RESULTS: Technical success was 100%. Intraprocedural and postprocedural complications were not encountered. Clinical follow-up was obtained in all patients. Recurrent stroke in the affected territory was not encountered. A recurrent ISR following DEB treatment was confirmed by DUS and CTA in 4/46 (8.7%) of the lesions and were retreated with DEB. A third recurrent ISR occurred in a single case (2%) and following a second DEB retreatment there were no signs of a fourth recurrence after 36 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: The use of DEB angioplasty is a safe and effective treatment of ICA ISR lesions, yielding significantly better results compared to other modalities. Randomized multicenter studies are warranted.

Recurrent Revascularization at 10 Years After Percutaneous Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with recurrence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains particularly challenging, with data and guideline recommendations for repeat percutaneous coronary intervention being scant. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term incidence of recurrent revascularization events after percutaneous treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, 402 patients (500 lesions) assigned to plain balloon (PB), drug-coated balloon (DCB), or DES treatment in the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 (Efficacy Study of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon, -Stent vs. Plain Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis) trial were followed up over a median of 10.3 years. The primary endpoint was total repeat target lesion revascularization (R-TLR) including all, first and recurrent, events. RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, first R-TLR was required in 204 lesions, 82 in the PB group, 70 in the DCB group, and 52 in the DES group. The total number of R-TLRs was 373: 162 in the PB group, 124 in the DCB group, and 87 in the DES group. During the first year of follow-up, the risk for total R-TLR was reduced by DCB (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.24-0.54) and DES (HR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14-0.38) treatment compared with PB treatment. After 1 year, the risk for total R-TLR was nonsignificantly reduced by DCB treatment (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.16) and significantly reduced by DES treatment (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.95) compared with PB treatment. Risk in the DCB and DES groups was similar during (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.89-2.69) and after (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.82-1.92) 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The total number of R-TLRs over 10 years after treatment of patients with DES ISR was high. DCBs and particularly DES were able to reduce the need for both first and recurrent revascularization compared with PB treatment.

Comparison of Drug-Coated Balloon and Drug-Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Small Vessel Disease (from the Dissolve SVD Randomized Trial).

The Dissolve drug-coated balloons (DCBs) is a new-generation DCB coated with paclitaxel of balloon surface, with midchain triglyceride excipient. Although the use of DCBs is a promising technique, little is known about the the clinical efficacy of the novel Dissolve DCB in coronary small vessel disease. This study was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, noninferiority trial comparing the Dissolve DCB with the Resolute drug-eluting stent (DES) in patients with a reference vessel diameter ≥2.25 and ≤2.75 mm. Patients with a reference vessel diameter ≥2.00 and <2.25 mm were enrolled in the very small vessel registry. The angiographic and clinical follow-up were planned at 9 months and 1 year in all patients, respectively. The primary end point was 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis. A total of 247 patients with small vessel disease from 10 Chinese sites were included (Dissolve DCB, n = 118; Resolute DES, n = 129); 30 patients were treated with the DCB in the very small vessel cohort. The 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis was 31.2 ± 2.0% with Dissolve DCB versus 26.1 ± 2.1% with Resolute DES; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 10.3% (p for noninferiority = 0.0002). At 12 months, the DCB and DES groups were associated with similar rates of target lesion failure (8.5% vs 6.1%, p = 0.28) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (20.9% vs 13.6%, p = 0.12). In conclusion, the Dissolve DCB was noninferior to the Resolute DES for the primary end point of 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis in this multicenter, head-to-head, randomized trial (a safety and efficacy study of Dissolve In Treatment Of Coronary Small Vessel Disease; NCT03376646).