A propensity score matched comparative study between paclitaxel-coated balloon and everolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of small coronary vessels.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the long-term clinical outcomes of paclitaxel drug-coated-balloons (DCB) and everolimus-eluting-stents (EES) following the treatment of de novo small vessel coronary artery disease. BACKGROUND: It is currently unclear whether treatment of de novo small vessel coronary disease with DCB is comparable to second generation drug-eluting stents, which are the current standard of care. METHODS: The present study enrolled 90 patients with small vessel coronary disease from the DCB treatment arm of the BELLO (Balloon Elution and Late Loss Optimization) trial and 2,000 patients treated with EES at the San Raffaele Scientific Institute. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics, yielding a total of 181 patients: 90 patients with 94 lesions receiving DCB and 91 patients with 94 lesions receiving EES. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as the composite of cardiac death, recurrent non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the two groups. The cumulative MACE rate at 1-year was 12.2% with DCB and 15.4% with EES (P = 0.538). Patients in the DCB group had similar TLR rates as compared to EES over the same interval (4.4% vs. 5.6%; P = 0.720). There were no cases of definite or probable stent or vessel thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of paclitaxel-DCB appears to be associated with similar clinical outcomes when compared to second-generation-EES in small coronary artery disease. The findings of this study should be confirmed with larger prospective randomized studies with longer follow-up. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Clinical outcomes following target lesion revascularization for bioresorbable scaffold failure.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate clinical outcomes following target lesion revascularization (TLR) for bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) failure in a real world population. BACKGROUND: BRS has become a new option in percutaneous coronary intervention, and may be potentially advantages because of the absence of a permanent metallic cage and the possibility for restoration of vasomotion and endothelial function. However, the requirement for TLR following BRS has been reported, but data on outcomes following reintervention are currently lacking. METHODS: Eighteen patients (20 lesions) who underwent TLR for BRS failure were identified at two high-volume centers in Milan, Italy. Clinical outcomes including all cause death, myocardial infarction, and repeat TLR after TLR for BRS failure were examined. RESULTS: The type of scaffold failure at TLR was classified into focal pattern in 15 lesions, diffuse pattern in two lesions, restenosis at side branch ostium in one lesion and scaffold thrombosis in two lesions. TLR was treated with plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) in two lesions, with drug-coating balloon in three lesions, drug eluting stent implantation in 11 lesions, further BRS implantation in four lesions. During the followup (median: 345 days after TLR), one sudden death and three repeat TLRs were observed. CONCLUSION: In our series, we observed an adverse event rate of 20% of during the followup period following TLR for BRS failure. The optimal treatment option for these patients remains to be determined.

Bioresorbable Everolimus-Eluting Vascular Scaffold for Long Coronary Lesions: A Subanalysis of the International, Multicenter GHOST-EU Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to investigate 1-year outcomes in patients treated with bioresorbable everolimus-eluting vascular scaffolds (BVS) for "long coronary lesions." BACKGROUND: The present substudy derived from the GHOST-EU registry included 1,722 lesions in 1,468 consecutive patients, enrolled between November 2011 and September 2014 at 11 European centers. METHODS: The lesions were divided into 3 groups according to continuous BVS length: 1) shorter than 30 mm; 2) between 30 and 60 mm; and 3) longer than 60 mm. Primary device-oriented endpoint (target lesion failure [TLF]) was defined as a combination of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: Patients with lesions ≥60 mm had more comorbidities and more complex lesion characteristics, including chronic total occlusions (37%), bifurcation lesions (40.3%), higher Syntax score (16.4 ± 7.8), and higher number of scaffolds implanted per lesion (3.3 ± 0.9 mm). The main target vessel was the left anterior coronary artery in all groups. Median follow-up was 384 (interquartile range: 359 to 459) days. One-year follow-up was completed in 70.3% of patients. TLF at 1 year was significantly higher in group C (group A 4.8%, group B 4.5%, group C 14.3%; overall p = 0.001), whereas there were no significant differences between groups A and B. Finally, a numerically higher (but not statistically significant) number of scaffold thromboses were observed in group C when compared with shorter lesions (group A 2.1%, group B 1.1%, group C 3.8%; overall p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, treatment of long coronary lesions with BVS ≥60 mm was associated with a higher TLF rate, driven by myocardial infarction and clinically driven target lesion revascularization.

Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents for the Management of Recurrent Multimetal-Layered In-Stent Restenosis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients presenting with recurrent drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) treated with a second-generation DES or with a drug-coated balloon (DCB). BACKGROUND: To date, there are no reports of DCB treatment and limited data with regard to the efficacy of further DES implantation for recurrent ISR. METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2013, 171 lesions were assessed for eligibility (82 lesions in the second-generation DES group and 89 lesions in the DCB group). RESULTS: Acute gain was greater in the second-generation DES group (second-generation DES, 2.09 ± 0.53 mm vs. DCBs, 1.60 ± 0.62 mm, p < 0.001). The rates of major adverse cardiac events were comparable (at 1 year, DES 14.0% vs. DCBs 12.3%; at 2 years, DES 28.8% vs. DCBs 43.5%, p = 0.21). Major adverse cardiac event rates were mainly driven by target lesion revascularization (at 1 year, DES 12.5% vs. DCBs 10.9%; at 2 years, DES 27.7% vs. DCBs 38.3%; p = 0.40). Definite scaffold thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (1 patient in each group). Multivariable analysis revealed ISR recurrence within 1 year (hazard ratio: 2.43, 95% confidence interval: 1.14 to 5.18, p = 0.02) and lesion length (per 10-mm increase) (hazard ratio: 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.32, p = 0.049) to be independent predictors of TLR. CONCLUSIONS: The results after both treatments were equivalent. ISR recurrence within 1 year of the first reintervention and lesion length were independent predictors of future target lesion revascularization. Larger studies are required to confirm the late (>1 year) differences with regard to clinical outcomes.

Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes After Polytetrafluoroethylene-Covered Stent Implantation for the Treatment of Coronary Perforation.

This study sought to evaluate the short-term and 3-year outcomes of polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stent (PCS) for patients with coronary perforation. Implantation of a PCS has improved the immediate clinical outcomes of patients with coronary perforation. However, there are few reports regarding long-term outcomes. We evaluated a total of 57 patients who were treated with PCS for coronary perforation from April 2004 to March 2015 at a single high-volume center in Japan. Landmark analysis was performed at 30 days to determine short-term and long-term outcomes. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and requirement for surgical repair. Of 285 patients who experienced coronary perforation, 57 patients (20%) were treated with PCS. The MACE rates were 28% at 30 days, 22% at 1 year, and 38% at 3 years. 30-day MACE was mainly driven by high rates of myocardial infarction (18%) and surgical repair (16%). The rates of target lesion revascularization were 8% and 12% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Definite stent thrombosis was reported in 2 patients during the follow-up period. In conclusion, despite the relatively high incidence of MACE during early stage of follow-up, implantation of a PCS provides acceptable late clinical outcomes.