Biolimus-coated versus paclitaxel-coated balloons for coronary in-stent restenosis (BIO ASCEND ISR): a randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains challenging in current clinical practice. AIMS: The study was conducted to investigate a novel biolimus-coated balloon (BCB) for the treatment of coronary DES-ISR compared with the best-investigated paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB). METHODS: This was a prospective, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial comparing a novel BCB with a clinically proven PCB for coronary DES-ISR. The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 9 months assessed by an independent core laboratory. Baseline and follow-up optical coherence tomography were performed in a prespecified subgroup of patients. RESULTS: A total of 280 patients at 17 centres were randomised to treatment with a BCB (n=140) versus a PCB (n=140). At 9 months, LLL in the BCB group was 0.23±0.37 mm compared to 0.25±0.35 mm in the PCB group; the mean difference between the groups was -0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.12 to 0.07) mm; p-value for non-inferiority<0.0001. Similar clinical outcomes were also observed for both groups at 12 months. In the optical coherence tomography substudy, the neointimal area at 9 months was 2.32±1.04 mm2 in the BCB group compared to 2.37±0.93 mm2 in the PCB group; the mean difference between the groups was -0.09 (95% CI: -0.94 to 0.76) mm2; p=non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: This head-to-head comparison of a novel BCB shows similar angiographic outcomes in the treatment of coronary DES-ISR compared with a clinically proven PCB. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04733443).

Effectiveness and safety of a novel intravascular lithotripsy system for severe coronary calcification: CALCI-CRACK trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravascular lithotripsy is effective and safe for managing coronary calcification; however, available devices are limited, and complex lesions have been excluded in previous studies. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of a novel intravascular lithotripsy system for severe calcification in a population with complex lesions. METHODS: CALCI-CRACK (ChiCTR2100052058) is a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study. The primary endpoint was the procedural success rate. Major safety endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and target lesion failure (TLF) at 30 days and 6 months, and severe angiographic complications. Calcification morphology was assessed in the optical coherence tomography (OCT) subgroup. RESULTS: In total, 242 patients from 15 high-volume Chinese centers were enrolled, including 26.45% of patients with true bifurcation lesions, 3.31% with severely tortuous vessels, and 2.48% with chronic total occlusion, respectively. The procedural success rate was 95.04% (95% confidence interval 91.50-97.41%), exceeding the pre-specified performance goal of 83.4% (p<0.001). The 30-day and 6-month MACE rates were 4.13% and 4.55%, respectively. TLF rates at these time-points were 1.24% and 1.65%, respectively. Severe angiographic complications occurred in 0.42% of patients. In the OCT subgroup (n=93), 93.55% of calcified lesions were fractured, and minimal lumen area increased from 1.55 ± 0.55 mm2 to 4.91 ± 1.22 mm2 after stent implantation, with acute gain rate of 245 ± 102%. CONCLUSIONS: The novel intravascular lithotripsy system is effective and safe for managing severely calcified coronary lesions in a cohort that included true bifurcation lesions, severely tortuous vessels, and chronic total occlusion. (ChiCTR2100052058).

E3 Ubiquitin Ligase ASB14 Inhibits Cardiomyocyte Proliferation by Regulating MAPRE2 Ubiquitination.

The ubiquitin proteasome system is a highly specific and selective protein regulatory system that plays an essential role in the regulation of the cell cycle. Despite its significance, the role of ubiquitination in cardiomyocyte proliferation remains largely unclear. This study aimed to investigate the potential impact of E3 ubiquitin ligase ASB14 (Ankyrin Repeat And SOCS Box Containing 14) on cardiac regeneration. We conducted a microarray analysis of apical resection ventricle tissues, and our findings revealed that ASB14 was down-regulated during the cardiac regenerative response. Subsequently, we examined the effect of ASB14 silencing on cardiomyocyte nuclear proliferation both in vitro and in vivo. Our results indicated that ASB14 silencing promoted cardiomyocyte nuclear proliferation, suggesting that ASB14 may play a role in regulating cardiac regeneration. To further investigate the potential therapeutic implications of ASB14 deficiency, we examined the cardiac function of mice with ASB14 deficiency in response to ischemic injury. Our findings showed that mice with ASB14 deficiency exhibited preserved cardiac function and a therapeutic effect in response to ischemic injury, which was attributed to the enhancement of cardiomyocyte nuclear proliferation. To elucidate the underlying mechanisms, we investigated the effect of ASB14 on microtubule-associated protein RP/EB family member 2 (MAPRE2) protein degradation. Our results indicated that the loss of ASB14 decreased the degradation of MAPRE2 protein, subsequently promoting cardiomyocyte nuclear proliferation and enhancing cardiac repair after myocardial infarction (MI). In conclusion, our study provides evidence that inhibition of ASB14-mediated MAPRE2 ubiquitination promotes cardiomyocyte nuclear proliferation, which may serve as a potential target for treating heart failure induced by MI injury.

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).

Drug-coated balloons for the treatment of ostial left anterior descending or ostial left circumflex artery lesions: a patient-level propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists as to the optimal treatment approach for ostial left anterior descending (LAD) or ostial left circumflex artery (LCx) lesions. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) may overcome some of the limitations of drug-eluting stents (DES). Therefore, we investigated the security and feasibility of the DCB policy in patients with ostial LAD or ostial LCx lesions, and compared it with the conventional DES-only strategy. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled patients with de novo ostial lesions in the LAD or LCx who underwent interventional treatment. They were categorized into two groups based on their treatment approach: the DCB group and the DES group. The treatment strategies in the DCB group involved the use of either DCB-only or hybrid strategies, whereas the DES group utilized crossover or precise stenting techniques. Two-year target lesion revascularization was the primary endpoint, while the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and vessel thrombosis were the secondary endpoints. Using propensity score matching, we assembled a cohort with comparable baseline characteristics. To ensure result analysis reliability, we conducted sensitivity analyses, including interaction, and stratified analyses. RESULTS: Among the 397 eligible patients, 6.25% of patients who were planned to undergo DCB underwent DES. A total of 108 patients in each group had comparable propensity scores and were included in the analysis. Two-year target lesion revascularization occurred in 5 patients (4.90%) and 16 patients (16.33%) in the DCB group and the DES group, respectively (odds ratio = 0.264, 95% CI: 0.093-0.752, P = 0.008). Compared with the DES group, the DCB group demonstrated a lower major adverse cardiovascular events rate (7.84% vs. 19.39%, P = 0.017). However, differences with regard to cardiac death, non-periprocedural target vessel myocardial infarction, and definite or probable vessel thrombosis between the groups were non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of the DCB approach signifies an innovative and discretionary strategy for managing isolated ostial lesions in the LAD or LCx. Nevertheless, a future randomized trial investigating the feasibility and safety of DCB compared to the DES-only strategy specifically for de novo ostial lesions in the LAD or LCx is highly warranted.

Incidence, risk factors, and clinical sequelae of incomplete stent apposition after sirolimus-eluting stent.

Incomplete stent apposition has been documented after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. However, its clinical sequelae remain controversial. To identify the incidence and its clinical consequences of ISA, IVUS was performed on 78 patients. In spite of well apposition immediately after the deployment, late stent malapposition occurred after 6-months follow-up. A total of 7 patients who received SES showed ISA. There were no significant differences in IVUS measurements between patients with or without ISA. However, there was an increase in external elastic membrane area in ISA group than non-ISA group (19.69 ± 3.50 vs. 15.05 ± 2.56 mm2, P<0.05). There were positive clinical events for ISA cases at 6-months clinical follow-up. Univariate and multivariable analyses indicated that hs-CRP, miR-21, and MMP-2 were risk factor for ISA. ISA was observed in 9% of patients after SES implantation, which was related to vessel positive remodeling. The incidence of MACEs in patients with ISA was higher than those without ISA. However, careful long-term follow-up remains to be clarified.

Long-term outcomes of drug-coated balloon treatment of calcified coronary artery lesions: a multicenter, retrospective, propensity matching study.

Background: Coronary artery calcification (CAC) is associated with high rates of restenosis and adverse clinical events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of drug-coated balloon (DCB)-only treatment for de novo lesions with and without CAC. Methods: Patients with de novo coronary disease treated with the DCB-only strategy were retrospectively enrolled from three centers and categorized into a CAC group and a non-CAC group. The primary endpoint was the target lesion failure (TLF) rate during the 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), target lesion revascularization (TLR), cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and any revascularization. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. Results: A total of 1,263 patients with 1,392 lesions were included, and 243 patients were included in each group after PSM. Compared with the non-CAC group, the incidence rates of TLF (9.52% vs. 4.94%, odds ratio [OR]: 2.080; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.083-3.998, P = 0.034) and TLR (7.41% vs. 2.88%, OR: 2.642; 95% CI: 1.206-5.787, P = 0.020) in the CAC group were higher. The incidence rates of MACE (12.35% vs. 7.82%, OR: 1.665; 95% CI: 0.951-2.916, P = 0.079), cardiac death (2.06% vs. 2.06%, OR: 0.995; 95% CI: 0.288-3.436, P = 0.993), MI (1.23% vs. 0.82%, OR: 2.505; 95% CI: 0.261-8.689, P = 0.652) and any revascularization (12.76% vs. 9.67%, OR: 1.256; 95% CI: 0.747-2.111, P = 0.738) were similar between groups. Conclusions: CAC increased the incidence of TLF and TLR without a substantial increase in the risk of MACE, cardiac death, MI, or any revascularization in patients treated with DCB-only angioplasty during the 3-year follow-up.

A Randomized Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons for In-Stent Restenosis.

BACKGROUND: Although use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) is a promising technique, little is known about the clinical efficacy of the Dissolve DCB in drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Dissolve DCB in patients with DES ISR. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing Dissolve DCB with SeQuent Please DCB in patients with DES ISR. Angiographic and clinical follow-up was planned at 9 months in all patients. The primary endpoint was 9-month in-segment late loss. RESULTS: A total of 260 patients with ISR from 10 Chinese sites were included (Dissolve DCB, n = 128; SeQuent Please DCB, n = 132). Nine-month in-segment late loss was 0.50 ± 0.06 mm with Dissolve DCB vs 0.47 ± 0.07 mm with SeQuent Please DCB; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 0.18 mm (P for noninferiority = 0.03). Rates of target lesion failure and binary restenosis were numerical higher in the Dissolve DCB cohort compared with the SeQuent Please DCB cohort at 9 months (17.5% vs 10.7%; P = 0.12; 23.4% vs 16.4%; P = 0.19, respectively). At 9 months, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 36 patients (28.3%) vs 30 patients (22.9%) in the Dissolve DCB and SeQuent Please DCB groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this head-to-head randomized trial, the Dissolve DCB was noninferior to the SeQuent Please DCB for 9-month in-segment late loss. However, Dissolve DCB with its numerical increase in target lesion failure and binary restenosis warrants assessment in larger clinical trials (A Safety and Efficacy Study of Dissolve™ in Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis; NCT03373695).

Short-term outcomes of drug-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent for de novo saphenous vein graft lesions in coronary heart disease.

Background: As a device for percutaneous coronary intervention, drug-coated balloon (DCB) is widely used to treat in-stent restenosis. However, data regarding the use of DCB in treating de novo saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions are limited. This study aimed to explore the outcomes of using the DCB in the treatment of de novo SVG lesions of coronary heart disease (CHD). Methods: This retrospective and observational study analyzed CHD patients with de novo SVG lesions treated with DCB or the new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) between January 2018 and December 2020. Restenosis was the primary endpoint, whereas target lesion revascularization (TLR), major adverse cardiac events, restenosis, cardiac death, target vessel revascularization, and myocardial infarction were the secondary outcomes. Results: We enrolled 31 and 23 patients treated with DCB and DES, respectively. The baseline clinical data, lesion characteristics, and procedural characteristics were similar between the two groups. Twenty-eight (90.3%) patients in the DCB group and 21 (91.3%) in the DES group completed follow-up angiography after 1 year. The quantitative coronary angiography measurements at angiographic follow-up showing late lumen loss were -0.07 ± 0.95 mm for the DCB group and 0.86 ± 0.71 mm for the DES group (P = 0.039), and the rates of restenosis were 13.3% and 21.7% for the DCB and DES groups, respectively (P = 0.470). No significant differences were observed in the rates of MACE (16.7% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.402) and TLR (13.3% vs. 4.3%, P = 0.374) during clinical follow-up. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that when pre-dilatation was successful, DCB might be safe and effective in treating de novo SVG lesions.

Long-term outcomes of less drug-eluting stents by the use of drug-coated balloons in de novo coronary chronic total occlusion intervention: A multicenter observational study.

Background: Data on drug-coated balloons (DCB) for de novo coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) are limited. We aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes of substitution of drug-eluting stents (DES) by DCB. Methods: We compared the outcomes of less DES strategy (DCB alone or combined with DES) and DES-only strategy in treating de novo coronary CTO in this prospective, observational, multicenter study. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, and death during 3-year follow-up. The secondary endpoints were late lumen loss (LLL) and restenosis until 1-year after operation. Results: Of the 591 eligible patients consecutively enrolled between January 2015 and December 2019, 281 (290 lesions) were treated with DCB (DCB-only or combined with DES) and 310 (319 lesions) with DES only. In the DCB group, 147 (50.7%) lesions were treated using DCB-only, and the bailout stenting rate was relatively low (3.1%). The average stent length per lesion in the DCB group was significantly shorter compared with the DES-only group (21.5 ± 25.5 mm vs. 54.5 ± 26.0 mm, p < 0.001). A total of 112 patients in the DCB group and 71 patients in the DES-only group (38.6% vs. 22.3%, p < 0.001) completed angiographic follow-up until 1-year, and LLL was much less in the DCB group (-0.08 ± 0.65 mm vs. 0.35 ± 0.62 mm, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in restenosis occurrence between the two groups (20.5% vs. 19.7%, p > 0.999). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of MACE at 3-year (11.8% vs. 12.0%, log-rank p = 0.688) was similar between the groups. Conclusion: Percutaneous coronary intervention with DCB is a potential "stent-less" therapy for de novo CTO lesions with satisfactory long-term clinical results compared to the DES-only approach.

Drug-coated balloon in the treatment of coronary left main true bifurcation lesion: A patient-level propensity-matched analysis.

Aims: An increasing body of evidence suggests that drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty represents a valuable option for revascularization in selected patients with coronary bifurcation disease. However, there remains a paucity of real-world observational evidence on the efficacy of DCB in left main (LM) true bifurcation lesion. We compared clinical and angiographic outcomes of hybrid [DCB + drug-eluting stent (DES)] versus DES-only strategy (provisional stenting or two-stent strategies) in de novo LM true bifurcated lesions. Methods: The primary endpoint was the 2-year composite rate of target lesion failure (TLF): cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). A routine 1-year angiographic follow-up was scheduled. Propensity-score matching was utilized to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. Results: Among 1077 eligible patients, 199 who received DCB treatment and 398 who were assigned to DES therapy had similar propensity scores and were included in the analysis. TLF within 2 years occurred in 13 patients (7.56%) assigned to DCB group, and 52 patients (14.36%) assigned to DES group (odds ratio: 0.487; 95% confidence interval: 0.258-0.922; P = 0.025; Log-rank P = 0.024). Compared with the DES group, the DCB group resulted in a lower rate of CD-TLR (2.91% vs. 9.42%; P = 0.007). Cardiac death, TVMI, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis were comparable between both groups. Patients treated with DES-only were associated with a higher late lumen loss (0.42 ± 0.62 mm vs. 0.13 ± 0.42 mm, P < 0.001) compared with the DCB group at 1 year. In sensitivity analysis, the DCB group also presented a lower incidence of TLF, CD-TLR and stent thrombosis both compared to the two-stent strategy and compared to provisional stenting (Ps < 0.05). Conclusion: The 2-year results of PCI utilizing DCB for LM true bifurcation lesions are superior to employing DES alone in terms of safety and effectiveness.

Long-term outcomes of drug-coated balloons in patients with diffuse coronary lesions.

Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCB), alone or in combination with drug-eluting stents (DES), may be used to treat diffuse coronary lesions. We aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of DCB in patients with diffuse coronary lesions. Methods: Consecutive patients with diffuse coronary lesions (lesion length > 25 mm) who underwent DCB and/or DES between January 2015 and December 2019 were included in this prospective, observational, multicenter study. The DCB group included 355 patients (360 lesions), of which 142 patients (143 lesions, 39.7%) received the DCB-only strategy and 213 patients (217 lesions, 60.3%) received the hybrid strategy (DCB combined with DES). The DES group included 672 patients (831 lesions) treated with DES alone. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) during 3-year follow-up was the primary outcome of interest. The secondary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Results: The two groups had comparable baseline clinical and lesion characteristics. Lesion length was similar (43.52 ± 16.46 mm vs. 44.87 ± 15.80 mm, P = 0.181), but the stent length in the DCB group was significantly shorter (24.02 ± 23.62 mm vs. 51.89 ± 15.81 mm, P < 0.001). Ten lesions (2.8%) in the DCB group received bailout stents. Over 3 years of follow-up, no significant difference in TLR incidence between the groups (7.3 vs. 8.3%, log-rank P = 0.636) was observed. Incidence of MACE also did not differ significantly (11.3 vs. 13.7%, log-rank P = 0.324). No thrombosis events occurred in the DCB group, while four patients (0.6%) in the DES group experienced stent thrombosis (log-rank P = 0.193). Moreover, similar TLR and MACE rates were observed between DCB-only and hybrid strategies (TLR: 6.4 vs. 8.0%, log-rank P = 0.651; MACE: 11.4 vs. 11.2%, log-rank P = 0.884). Conclusion: Long-term outcomes show that the efficacy and safety of the DCB strategy (DCB alone or combined with DES) are similar to those of DES alone in diffuse coronary lesions. These findings suggest that this strategy is a promising alternative for select patients with diffuse coronary lesions.

Stentless at ostium: a novel approach for treating ostial left anterior descending or left circumflex coronary artery lesions with drug-coated balloons.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no optimal treatment strategy for ostial left anterior descending (LAD) or ostial left circumflex artery (LCx) lesions. This study explored effectiveness and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCB) in individuals presenting with ostial LAD or LCx lesions. METHODS: A total of 137 patients with de novo ostial LAD or LCx lesions scheduled for DCB treatment were prospectively recruited into the study. After mandatory lesion preparation, DCB-only or hybrid strategy [DCB + drug-eluting stent (DES)] were performed on 120 patients (87.59%). The primary endpoint was the rate of 2-year target lesion revascularization (TLR). Rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), and vessel thrombosis were explored as the secondary outcomes. Quantitative coronary angiography software was used to analyze coronary angiograms. RESULTS: Of the participants, 58 were treated with DCB-only and 62 with hybrid strategy. Relative to the DCB-only group, patients in the hybrid group had longer target lesions (15.47 ± 10.08 vs. 36.85 ± 9.46 mm, P<0.001) and higher Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) scores (23.47 ± 5.22 vs. 29.98 ± 3.18, P<0.001). During follow-up (731 ± 64 days), neither the primary endpoint (TLR) nor the secondary endpoints (including MACE, cardiac death, TVMI, and vessel thrombosis) differed statistically between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Treatment strategy (DCB-only or hybrid) was not a significant risk factor for TLR. Patients who underwent DCB-only exhibited less late lumen loss compared with the patients who underwent hybrid strategy (-0.26 ± 0.59 vs. 0.42 ± 0.47 mm, P<0.001) at 1-year angiographic follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: With regards to safety and efficacy, the strategy of DCB as a standalone therapy was similar in comparison with the hybrid strategy of DCB + DES for ostial LAD and ostial LCx lesions. This approach might be effective and technically easy in treating ostial LAD and LCx diseases.

Exploring Key Genes to Construct a Diagnosis Model of Dilated Cardiomyopathy.

Background: Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is characterized by left ventricular dilatation and systolic dysfunction. The pathogenesis and etiologies of DCM remain elusive. This study aims to identify the key genes to construct a genetic diagnosis model of DCM. Methods: A total of 257 DCM samples from five independent cohorts were enrolled. The Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis (WGCNA) was performed to identify the key modules associated with DCM. The latent mechanisms and protein-protein interaction network underlying the key modules were further revealed. Subsequently, we developed and validated a LASSO diagnostic model in five independent cohorts. Results: Two key modules were identified using WGCNA. Novel mechanisms related to the extracellular, mitochondrial matrix or IL-17 signaling pathway were pinpointed, which might significantly influence DCM. Besides, 23 key genes were screened out by combining WGCNA and differential expression analysis. Based on the key genes, a genetic diagnosis model was constructed and validated using five cohorts with excellent AUCs (0.975, 0.954, 0.722, 0.850, 0.988). Finally, significant differences in immune infiltration were observed between the two groups divided by the diagnostic model. Conclusion: Our study revealed several novel pathways and key genes to provide potential targets and biomarkers for DCM treatment. A key genes' diagnosis model was built to offer a new tool for diagnosing DCM.

Rationale and design for comparison of non-compliant balloon with drug-coating balloon angioplasty for side branch after provisional stenting for patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions: a prospective, multicentre and randomised DCB-BIF trial.

INTRODUCTION: Provisional stenting using drug-eluting stent is effective for simple coronary bifurcation lesions. Kissing balloon inflation using conventional non-compliant balloon is the primary treatment of side branch (SB) after main vessel (MV) stenting. Drug-coating balloon (DCB) is reported to be associated with less frequent clinical events in in-stent restenosis and small vessel disease. The importance of DCB in bifurcation treatment is understudied. Accordingly, this trial is designed to investigate the superiority of DCB to non-compliant balloon angioplasty for SB after provisional stenting in patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The DCB-BIF trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, superiority trial including 784 patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions. Patients will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to receive either DCB or non-compliant balloon angioplasty if SB diameter stenosis >70% after MV stenting. The primary endpoint is the composite of major adverse cardiac event at the 1-year follow-up, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) or clinically driven target lesion revascularisation. The major secondary endpoints include all-cause death, periprocedural MI, spontaneous MI, clinically driven target vessel revascularisation, in-stent restenosis, stroke and individual component of the primary endpoint. The safety endpoint is the risk of stent thrombosis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and informed consent have been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of all participating centres. The written informed consent for participation in the trial will be obtained from all participants. The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04242134.

Clinical outcomes of drug-coated balloon in coronary lesions: a real-world, all-comers study.

BACKGROUNDS: Although drug-eluting stents are the most common interventional devices for patients with coronary disease, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) represent a novel therapeutic alternative in certain scenarios. This prospective, observational all-comers study explored the clinical outcomes of DCB use in patients with coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients treated with DCBs were enrolled in this study, including patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) or de novo lesions. The primary outcome was the target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate at one year. We enrolled 2306 patients with 2660 lesions and performed DCB angioplasty in 399 patients (17.3%) with ISR and 1907 patients (82.7%) with de novo lesions. During follow-up (366 ± 46 days), the TLR rate was lower in the de novo lesion group (1.31%) compared to the ISR group (7.02%) [odds ratio (OR) 0.176, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.101-0.305, p < 0.001]. Patients with de novo lesions had a lower yearly incidence of MACE compared to ISR patients (2.73 vs. 9.27%, respectively, OR 0.274, 95% CI 0.177-0.424, p < 0.001) and a lower incidence of any revascularization (5.09 vs. 13.03%, OR 0.358, 95% CI 0.251-0.510, p < 0.001). No significant differences between groups were observed in the rates of cardiac death (OR 0.783, 95% CI 0.258-2.371, p = 0.655) or MI (OR 0.696, 95% CI 0.191-2.540, p = 0.573). CONCLUSIONS: DCB angioplasty in this all-comers, real-world, prospective study was safe and efficient with low TLR and MACE rates. Thus, DCB appears to be an attractive alternative for the stent-less treatment of de novo coronary lesions. ISR in-stent restenosis; OR odds ratio; CI confidence interval; TLR target lesion revascularization; MACE major adverse cardiovascular events; MI myocardial infraction. MACE defined as the composite outcome of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Any revascularization includes any percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass grafting.

Drug-Coated Balloon-Only Angioplasty Outcomes in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients with De Novo Small Coronary Vessels Disease.

BACKGROUND: The revascularization of small vessels using drug-eluting stents remains challenging. The use of the drug-coated balloon is an attractive therapeutic strategy in de novo lesions in small coronary vessels, particularly in the diabetic group. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of DCB-only angioplasty in small vessel disease. METHODS: A total of 1198 patients with small vessel disease treated with DCB-only strategy were followed. Patients were divided into the diabetic and nondiabetic groups. Clinical and angiographical follow-up were organized at 12 months. The primary endpoints were target lesion failure and secondary major adverse cardiac events. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher rate of target lesion failure among diabetic patients compared to nondiabetic [17 (3.9%) vs. 11 (1.4%), P=0.006], taken separately, the rate of target lesion revascularization significantly differed between groups with a higher rate observed in the diabetic group [9 (2%) vs. 4 (0.5%), P=0.014]. Diabetes mellitus remained an independent predictor for TLF (HR: 2.712, CI: 1.254-5.864, P=0.011) and target lesion revascularization (HR: 3.698, CI: 1.112-12.298, P=0.033) after adjustment. However, no significant differences were observed between groups regarding the target vessel myocardial infarction (0.6% vs. 0.1%, P=0.110) and MACE [19 (4.4%) vs. 21 (2.7%), P=0.120]. CONCLUSION: Drug-coated balloon-only treatment achieved lower incidence rates of TLF and MACE. Diabetes is an independent predictor for target lesion failure and target lesion revascularization at one year following DCB treatment in small coronary vessels. We observed no significant differences between groups regarding MACE in one year.

Clinical Outcomes of Drug-Coated Balloon in Coronary Patients with and without Diabetes Mellitus: A Multicenter, Propensity Score Study.

BACKGROUND: Relative to nondiabetic patients, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with inferior clinical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of drug-coated balloon (DCB) in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this observational, prospective, multicenter study, we compared the outcomes of patients with and without DM after undergoing PCI with DCBs. Target lesion failure (TLF) was analyzed as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were the rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and any revascularization. Propensity score matching was used to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. Among 2,306 eligible patients, 578 with DM and 578 without DM had similar propensity scores and were included in the analyses. During follow-up (366 ± 46 days), compared with DM patients, patients without DM were associated with a lower yearly incidence of TLF (2.77% vs. 5.36%; OR, 1.991; 95% CI, 1.077 to 3.681; P = 0.025) and TLR (1.90% vs. 4.15%; OR, 2.233; 95% CI, 1.083 to 4.602; P = 0.026). No significant differences were observed with regards to rates of MACE (OR: 1.580, 95% CI: 0.912-2.735; P = 0.100), cardiac death (OR: 1.608, 95% CI: 0.523-4.946; P = 0.403), MI (OR: 4.042, 95% CI: 0.855-19.117; P = 0.057), and any revascularization (OR: 1.534, 95% CI: 0.983-2.393; P = 0.058). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic patients experience higher TLF and TLR rates following DCB angioplasty without substantial increase in the risk of MACE, cardiac death, MI, or revascularization.

The association between serum selenium concentration and prognosis in patients with heart failure in a Chinese population.

Whether Selenium (Se) deficiency relates with adverse prognosis in Chinese patients with heart failure (HF) is still unknown. This study aimed to investigate the association of serum Se level and the outcomes of patients with HF in a Chinese population. Patients with HF and serum Se examination were retrospectively included. Baseline information were collected at patient's first admission. The primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and rehospitalization for HF during follow-up, respectively. The study participants were divided into quartiles according to their serum Se concentrations. The Cox proportional hazard models were adopted to estimate the association of serum Se levels with observed outcomes. A total of 411 patients with HF with a mean age of 62.5 years were included. The mean serum level of Se was 68.3 ± 27.7 µg/L. There was nonsignificant difference of baseline characterizes between the four quartile groups. In comparison with patients in the highest quartile, those with the lowest quartile (17.40-44.35 µg/L) were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality [adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) 2.32 (1.43-3.77); Ptrend = 0.001]. Our study suggested that a lower serum Se level was significantly associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality in patients with HF.