Clinical Impact of the Size of Drug-Coated Balloon Therapy on Restenosis Rate in Femoropopliteal Lesions.

PURPOSE: Although the size of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) is determined according to the vessel diameter during femoropopliteal (FP)-endovascular therapy (EVT), the measurements of the vessel diameter vary among modalities and its definitions. The aim of this study was to reveal whether the DCB size fitting (1) angiographically-measured lumen diameter (Angio-lumen size), (2) intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-measured lumen diameter (IVUS-lumen size), or (3) IVUS-measured external elastic membrane (EEM) diameter (IVUS-EEM size) would be beneficial in restenosis occurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, single-center study included 231 de novo FP lesions in 165 patients with peripheral artery disease treated with IN.PACT Admiral DCB under IVUS evaluation. The reference vessel diameter was evaluated as the lumen or EEM diameter at the healthy site distal to the lesion. We retrospectively determined whether the DCB size was close to (ie, equal to or different by <0.5 mm from) Angio-lumen size, IVUS-lumen size, and IVUS-EEM size. The association of the size of DCB with restenosis risk was investigated. RESULTS: The mean lesion length was 13 ± 9 cm and the prevalence of chronic total occlusion was 18%. During a mean follow-up period of 17 ± 9 months, restenosis occurred in 26% of lesions. Lesions treated with a DCB of IVUS-EEM size had a lower 2 year restenosis rate than those treated with a DCB over/under IVUS-EEM size (19.7 ± 5.7% vs 34.5 ± 4.7%, p=0.02 by the log-rank test), while the restenosis rate was not significantly different between DCBs of Angio-lumen size or IVUS-lumen size and those over/under the size (both p>0.05). The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that DCBs of IVUS-EEM size were independently associated with a reduced risk of restenosis (adjusted hazard ratio 0.50; 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.95; p=0.03). CONCLUSION: The DCBs of IVUS-EEM size, but not of Angio-lumen size or IVUS-lumen size, were associated with a reduced risk of restenosis after FP-EVT. Determining the DCB size according to IVUS-evaluated EEM diameter would be potentially beneficial in restenosis occurrence.

Comparing Predictors Influencing Restenosis Following High-Dose Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty and Fluoropolymer-Based Drug-Eluting Stenting in Femoropopliteal Artery Lesions.

PURPOSE: Despite widespread use of anti-restenosis devices, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and drug-eluting stents (DESs), their appropriate use for femoropopliteal (FP) lesions has not been well investigated and the risk factors for restenosis have not been compared. To investigate risk factors associated with restenosis after endovascular therapy using DCB and DES for contemporary FP lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, observational study evaluated 378 FP lesions in 273 patients treated with DCB (278 lesions in 193 patients) or DES (120 lesions in 106 patients). The DCB used was high-dose DCB (IN.PACT, Admiral. Medtronic, Inc.) and DES was fluoropolymer-based DES (ELUVIA, Boston Scientific). Vessel preparation failure was defined as a residual stenosis of ≥50% and a dissection grade of D or greater on pre-dilatation angiography. The outcome measure was restenosis, and factors associated with restenosis in the DCB and DES groups were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The 2-year restenosis rate was not significantly different between the DCB and DES groups (29%±4% vs. 24%±5%, p=0.42). Interaction analysis demonstrated that popliteal lesions and plaque burden of ≥50% were restenosis-related factors for DES but not for DCB, whereas vessel preparation failure was a factor for DCB but not for DES (p<0.05). Vessel diameter of <6 mm and nodular calcification were risk factors in both groups (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: In contemporary FP lesions, smaller vessels and nodular calcification were shared restenosis-related factors for high-dose DCB and fluoropolymer-based DES. Popliteal lesions and plaque burden of ≥50% were restenosis-related factors for fluoropolymer-based DES and vessel preparation failure for high-dose DCB. CLINICAL IMPACT: Shared and differential restenosis-related factors after endovascular therapy using high-dose drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and fluoropolymer-based drug-eluting stents (DESs) in contemporary femoropopliteal (FP) lesions are unclear. This single-center retrospective study included 378 FP lesions in 273 patients with lower-extremity arterial disease (high-dose DCB, 278 lesions in 193 patients; fluoropolymer-based DES, 120 lesions in 106 patients). Smaller vessels and calcified nodules were shared restenosis-related factors for both high-dose DCB and fluoropolymer-based DES, whereas popliteal lesions and plaque burden of ≥50% were restenosis-related factors for fluoropolymer-based DES and vessel preparation failure for high-dose DCB.

Slow whole left atrial conduction velocity after pulmonary vein isolation predicts atrial fibrillation recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Atrial conduction velocity may represent atrial fibrillation (AF) substrate after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). To elucidate the association between whole left atrial conduction velocity (LACV) and AF recurrence after PVI. METHODS AND RESULTS: This observational study enrolled 279 patients (147 paroxysmal and 132 persistent AF) who underwent PVI alone as an initial AF ablation procedure. After PVI, the left atrium was mapped with a 20-pole multielectrode in conjunction with the CARTO3 system during 100-ppm right atrial pacing. Left atrial conduction distance and conduction time were calculated from the start to the end of the propagation wave front in the left atrium. LACVs on the anterior and posterior routes were calculated as conduction distance divided by conduction time. Anterior and posterior LACVs were slower in patients with AF recurrence than in those without (anterior, 0.79 [0.71, 0.86] vs 0.96 [0.90, 1.06] m/s, P < .001; posterior, 0.99 [0.89, 1.14] vs 1.10 [1.00, 1.29] m/s, P < .001). AF recurrence was best predicted by anterior LACV with a cut-off value of 0.87 m/s (sensitivity 87%, specificity 81%, and predictive accuracy 84%). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a slow anterior LACV <0.87 m/s was an independent predictor of AF recurrence with an adjusted hazard ratio of 11.8 (6.36-22.0). Patients with anterior low-voltage areas demonstrated slower anterior LACV than those without low-voltage areas (0.89 [0.71, 1.00] vs 0.94 [0.87, 1.05] m/s, P < .001). CONCLUSION: A slow anterior LACV was an excellent predictor of AF recurrence after PVI.