Efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons in chronic total coronary occlusion recanalization: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: With advancements in chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) recanalization techniques and concepts, the success rate of recanalization has been steadily increasing. However, the current data are too limited to draw any reliable conclusions about the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis to confirm the efficacy of DCB in CTO PCI. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science and Embase from inception to July 25, 2023. The primary outcome was major advent cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The follow-up angiographic endpoints were late lumen enlargement (LLE), reocclusion and restenosis. RESULTS: Five studies with a total of 511 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Across studies, patients were predominantly male (72.9-85.7%) and over fifty years old. The summary estimate rate of MACE was 13.0% (95% CI 10.1%-15.9%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.428). The summary estimate rates of cardiac death and MI were 2.2% (95% CI 0.7%-3.7%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.873) and 1.2% (95% CI -0.2-2.6%, I2 = 13.7%, p = 0.314), respectively. Finally, the pooled incidences of TLR and TVR were 10.1% (95% CI 5.7%-14.5%, I2 = 51.7%, p = 0.082) and 7.1% (95% CI 3.0%-11.2%, I2 = 57.6%, p = 0.070), respectively. Finally, the summary estimate rates of LLE, reocclusion and restenosis were 59.4% (95% CI 53.5-65.3%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.742), 3.3% (95% CI 1.1-5.4%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.865) and 17.5% (95% CI 12.9-22.0%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.623), respectively. CONCLUSION: Accordingly, DCB has the potential to be used as a treatment for CTO in suitable patients.

Long-term follow-up after sirolimus-coated balloon use for coronary artery disease. Final results of the Nanolutè study.

OBJECTIVES: To test the long-term efficacy of a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB). BACKGROUND: Nanoluté was a prospective registry to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel SCB (Concept Medical Research Private Limited, India) for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions and in-stent restenosis (ISR). We here present the 24 months clinical data. METHODS: All patients treated with SCB for any type of coronary indication between July 2012 and September 2015 were enrolled at Indian centers and clinically followed up to 24 months. Primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as a composite of cardiac death, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel-myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: A total of 484 SCBs were used in 408 patients to treat 435 lesions. In detail, the SCB was used for 183 patients with ISR, 185 with de novo small vessel disease, and 40 with de novo large vessel disease. Mean balloon length and diameter (average ± SD) were 22.3 ± 7.1 mm and 2.7 ± 0.40 mm, respectively. All patients with 24 months follow-up were included. Overall MACE rate was 4.2% (n = 17) with three cardiac deaths (0.7%), 13 TLR (3.2%), and one MI (0.2%). CONCLUSION: The Nanoluté prospective registry is the first long-term clinical evidence of the safety and feasibility of this type of SCB, both in patients with ISR or de novo lesions.

Two decades after coronary radiation therapy: A single center longitudinal clinical study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the very long-term clinical outcome after radioactive stent (RS) implantation and intracoronary ß radiation brachytherapy (IRBT). BACKGROUND: Radioactive stents (RS) and intracoronary ß radiation brachytherapy (IRBT) were introduced to prevent restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Both techniques were associated with a higher incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in the short and intermediate-term follow up as compared to conventional PCI. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-three patients received radioactive stents (32 P) and 301 patients were treated with IRBT adjunctive to PCI. These groups were propensity matched to respectively 266 and 602 control patients who were treated with routine PCI during the same inclusion period. Endpoints were all-cause mortality and MACE, defined as all-cause death, any myocardial infarction or any revascularization. RESULTS: Median follow-up duration was 17 years. All-cause mortality rates were similar in all groups. Adjusted hazard ratios for MACE and mortality in the RS cohort were 1.55 (95% CI 1.20-2.00) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.63-1.34), respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios for MACE and all-cause mortality in the IRBT cohort were 1.41 (95% CI 1.18-1.67) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.74-1.21), respectively. The difference in MACE rates was predominantly driven by coronary revascularizations in both groups, with a higher MI rate in the IRBT group as well. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary radiation therapy was associated with early increased MACE rates, but the difference in MACE rates decreased beyond 2 years, resulting in a comparable long-term clinical outcome. Importantly, no excess in mortality was observed.

Efficacy of drug-coated balloon angioplasty in early versus late occurring drug-eluting stent restenosis: A pooled analysis from the randomized ISAR DESIRE 3 and DESIRE 4 trials.

BACKGROUND: Whether there exist differences concerning clinical outcomes between patients presenting with early versus late DES-ISR undergoing treatment with drug-coated balloons (DCB) remains a scientific knowledge gap. METHODS: This is a pooled analysis including patients with DES-ISR assigned to treatment with DCB in the setting of the ISAR DESIRE 3 and 4 trials. Clinical outcomes were evaluated according to time of occurrence of ISR after DES implantation, in patients presenting with early (≤12 months) versus late DES-ISR (>12 months) undergoing treatment with DCB. The primary endpoint of this analysis was major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months after DCB treatment. Secondary endpoints included the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, TLR and target lesion thrombosis at 12 months after DCB treatment. RESULTS: This analysis included 352 patients, 199 patients presented with early-ISR, 153 patients with late-ISR. Concerning the primary endpoint, patients with early-DES-ISR as compared those with late-DES-ISR showed significant higher risk (25.9% vs. 17.0%; p = .04). In a multivariate analysis including diabetic status, clinical presentation, previous coronary bypass graft and diameter stenosis after DCB-treatment, the adjusted hazard ratio showed significant higher risk for MACE of early-DES-ISR as compared to late-DES-ISR (HRadj = 1.8, [95% CI = 1.1-3.0], p = .02). CONCLUSION: Clinical outcome at 12 months after treatment of DES-ISR with DCB, showed significant higher clinical event rates in patients presenting with early DES restenosis, as compared with patients presenting with late DES restenosis.

Long-term clinical safety and efficacy of drug-coated balloon in the treatment of in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical safety and efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). BACKGROUND: There is a long-term safety issue in peripheral arterial disease patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon, this has also raised concerns on DCB in coronary intervention. METHODS: Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nine observational studies (OSs) were included with a total of 3,782 patients (1,827 in the DCB group, 1,955 in the drug-eluting stent [DES] group) being analyzed. The primary outcome measure-major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death (CD), stent thrombosis (ST), all-cause death (AD), and coronary angiography outcomes included late lumen loss (LLL), minimum luminal diameter (MLD), diameter stenosis (DS) were analyzed. RESULTS: DCB treatment significantly reduced the LLL (MD: -0.13; [CI -0.23 to -0.03], p = .01). No difference was found for MLD (MD: -0.1; [CI -0.24 to 0.04], p = .17) and DS% (RR = 0.98 [CI 0.80-1.20], p = .86). There was no significant difference in TLR, TVR, MI, CD, ST, AD, and the overall incidence of MACEs between the two groups up to 3 years follow-up. Subgroup analysis for different type of ISR and DES showed no significant difference in the incidence of endpoints, and there is no difference when considering RCTs or OSs only. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy of the DCB and DES in the treatment of ISR is comparable at up to 3 years follow-up.

A comparison between drug-eluting stent implantation and drug-coated balloon angioplasty in patients with left main bifurcation in-stent restenotic lesions.

BACKGROUND: The current guidelines recommend both repeat stenting and drug-coated balloons (DCB) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions, if technically feasible. However, real-world clinical data on the interventional strategies in patients with left main bifurcation (LMB)-ISR have not been elucidated. METHODS: Seventy-five patients with LMB-ISR, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between January 2009 and July 2015, were retrospectively reviewed for the present study (repeat drug eluting stent [DES] implantation [n = 51], DCB angioplasty [n = 24]). RESULTS: Analysis of the baseline characteristics showed that the patients in the DCB group had a lower incidence of non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction/ST segment elevation myocardial infarction at the index PCI (8.3% vs. 25.5%; p = 0.12), higher low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level (92.9 mg/dL vs. 81.7 mg/dL; p = 0.09), and more "stent-in-stent" lesions (25% vs. 7.8%; p = 0.07) than those in the DES group. A smaller post-procedural minimal target lesion lumen diameter was also noted in the DCB group than in the DES group (2.71 mm vs. 2.85 mm; p = 0.03). The cumulative incidence rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were similar between both groups (median follow-up duration, 868 days; MACE rate, 25% in the DCB group vs. 25.5% in the DES group; p = 0.96). The multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that the true bifurcation of ISR was an independent risk predictor of MACEs (hazard ratio, 4.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.572-13.561; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: DES and DCB showed comparable long-term clinical results in patients with LMB-ISR lesions.

Long-term outcome of brachytherapy treatment for coronary in-stent restenosis: Ten-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients treated with intracoronary brachytherapy (ICBT) for coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). BACKGROUND: ICBT was commonly used to treat coronary ISR prior to the availability of drug-eluting stents (DES). The long-term outcomes of ICBT for ISR remain unknown. METHODS: Six hundred and eighty consecutive patients who underwent ICBT treated for ISR between September 1998 and April 2005 were included in the study. Clinical and angiographic data were collected and the long-term MACE were measured for all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 10-year follow-up. RESULTS: Patients were 63 ± 11 years old (66% male). The majority of patients were treated with a bare metal stent 670/680 (99%) prior to ICBT. Significant baseline clinical findings include high incidence of smokers 479/680 (70%), hyperlipidemia 638/680 (94%), and multivessel disease 526/680 (77%). The majority of target lesions were diffuse 407/680 (60%), and either in the left anterior descending 258/680 (38%) or right coronary artery 215/680 (32%). At 10-year follow-up, the rate of death was 25%, MI was 22.4%, and TVR was 48%. CONCLUSION: MACE at 10-year follow-up following ICBT for ISR indicates steady rate of death and MI and declining rate of TVR after 5 years.

Is a covered stent justifiable in the treatment of coronary artery perforation? An observational analysis of long-term results of two different covered stent types.

OBJECTIVES: In this retrospective observational study, we investigate outcome of patients treated with or without covered stent (CS) implantation in the management of coronary artery perforation (CAP) during coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: CSs have shown to be effective devices to achieve acute hemostasis in large CAP. However, doubts have been raised regarding their long-term outcome. METHODS: Data of 19 061 PCI procedures during a 10-year period were reviewed. Fifty-five cases of large CAP were withheld (Ellis type 2, 3 or cavity spilling). All medical and procedural records of these cases were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-four (43.6%) patients were treated with CS implantation (15 polytetrafluoroethylene and 9 pericardium CSs). Twenty-six (47.3%) patients were managed without CS implantation, of whom five had unsuccessful delivery of a CS (stent delivery failure 17.2%). Although significantly more Ellis type-3 perforations were present in the CS group compared to the Non-CS group (75.0% vs 45.2%; P = 0.03), in-hospital mortality was not significantly different (8.3% vs 6.4%; [P = 0.79]). We observed a high rate of CS restenosis (29.2%) but a lower rate of CS thrombosis (4.2%). Despite these observations, 5-year MACE and all-cause mortality were not significantly different between CS and Non-CS group (respectively, 58.8% vs 50.0% (P = 0.26) and 26.7% vs 13.3% (P = 0.36)). CONCLUSION: Although deliverability of CSs was not flawless and a high rate of CS restenosis appeared, short- and long-term outcome were comparable between patients treated with or without CS. Therefore, CSs are justifiable in the treatment of CAP.

Association of Elevated Plasma Homocysteine Level with Restenosis and Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: a Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: We conducted this systemic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between elevated plasma homocysteine (Hcy) levels and recurrent restenosis and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were systematically searched prior to May 2018. Studies evaluating the association between plasma Hcy levels and the occurrence of restenosis, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all-cause mortality, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization were identified. RESULTS: A total of 19 articles with 4340 participants were identified. Higher Hcy levels were not associated with an increased risk of restenosis (relative risk (RR) = 1.10, 95% CI 0.90-1.33). Hcy levels in the restenosis group were not significantly higher than in the non-restenosis group (weighted mean difference = 0.70, 95% CI - 0.23-1.63). Subgroup analysis revealed that higher Hcy levels were not associated with restenosis after stenting but appeared to increase the risk of restenosis after angioplasty. Elevated Hcy levels increased the risk of all-cause mortality by an average of 3.19-fold (RR = 3.19, 95% CI 1.90-5.34, P = 0.000), the risk of MACE by 1.51-fold (RR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.23-1.85, P = 0.000), and the risk of cardiac death by 2.76-fold (RR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.44-5.32, P = 0.000) but appeared not to increase the risk of non-fatal MI (RR = 1.36, 95% CI 0.89-2.09). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that although there is no clear association between higher Hcy levels and restenosis following stent implantation, higher Hcy levels appeared to increase the risk of restenosis after coronary angioplasty and also increased the risk of all-cause mortality, MACE, and cardiac death after PCI. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The protocol of this meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018096466). ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018096466 ).

Do ultrathin strut bare-metal stents with passive coating improve efficacy in large coronary arteries? Insights from the randomized, multicenter BASKET-PROVE trials.

BACKGROUND: The new generation thinner-strut silicon carbide (SiC) coated cobalt chromium (CoCr) bare-metal stents (BMS) are designed to accelerate rapid endothelialisation and reduce thrombogenicity when implanted in coronary arteries. However, smaller studies suggest higher rates of symptomatic restenosis in patients receiving the newer generation BMS. We investigated the efficacy of a newer generation ultrathin strut silicon-carbide coated cobalt-chromium (CoCr) BMS (SCC-BMS) as compared to an older thin-strut uncoated CoCr BMS (UC-BMS) in patients presenting with coronary artery disease requiring stenting of large vessels (≥3.0 mm). METHODS: All patients randomized to SCC- (n = 761) or UC-BMS (n = 765) in the two BASKET-PROVE trials were included. Design, patients, interventions and follow-up were similar between trials except differing regimens of dual antiplatelet therapy. The primary endpoint was clinically driven target-vessel revascularization within 24 months. Safety endpoints of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) were also assessed. We used inverse probability weighted proportional hazards Cox regressions adjusting for known confounders. RESULTS: Demographics, clinical presentation, and risk factors were comparable between the groups, but patients receiving SCC-BMS underwent less complex procedures. The risk for clinically driven TVR was increased om the SCC-BMS group compared to the UC-BMS group (cumulative incidence, 10.6% vs. 8.4%; adjusted relative hazard [HR], 1.49 [95% CI, 1.05-2.10]). No differences in safety endpoints were detected, cardiac death (1.6% vs. 2.8%; HR, 0.62 [CI, 0.30-1.27]), non-fatal MI (3.2% vs. 2.5%; HR, 1.56 [CI, 0.83-2.91]), and definite/probable ST (0.8% vs. 1.1%; HR, 1.17 [CI, 0.39-3.50]). Differences in strut thickness between the two stents did not explain the association between stent type and clinically driven TVR. CONCLUSIONS: In patients requiring stenting of large coronary arteries, use of the newer generation SCC-BMS was associated with a higher risk of clinically driven repeat revascularization compared to the UC-BMS with no signs of an offsetting safety benefit.

The clinical impact of sex differences on ischemic postconditioning during primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a POST (the effects of postconditioning on myocardial reperfusion in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) substudy.

The POST (the effects of postconditioning on myocardial reperfusion in patients with ST-Segment elevation myocardial infarction) study showed that ischemic postconditioning did not improve myocardial reperfusion in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it has not been determined whether postconditioning is effective in women. This study sought to evaluate the impact of sex differences on ischemic postconditioning during the primary PCI. We analyzed clinical outcomes at 1 year in the 537 men and 163 women with STEMI, who were randomized to the postconditioning or to the conventional PCI group. Women were older, had higher rates of hypertension, were less likely to be current smokers, and had longer symptom-to-reperfusion time. The rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE: a composite of death, myocardial infarction, severe heart failure, stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization) at 1 year was higher in women compared to men (9.8% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.044). MACE was significantly higher in women compared to men in the postconditioning group (12.2% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.042), but not in the conventional PCI group (7.9% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.391). However, women was not an independent predictor after adjusting baseline risk factors, angiographic and procedural parameters (HR 2.67, 95% CI 0.68-10.5, p = 0.158). Despite women having more adverse clinical characteristics, their prognosis was similar to men in the conventional group. Although women showed a higher rate of the MACE compared to men, women were not an independent predictor in the postconditioning group.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of two different types of paclitaxel-coated balloons for treatment of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis.

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has been shown to be a promising option for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with ISR who were treated with two commonly used paclitaxel-containing DCBs, the Pantera Lux (PL) and SeQuent Please (SP). A total of 491 patients with 507 ISR lesions [PL-DCB in 127 (26%) patients and SP-DCB in 364 (74%) patients] underwent DCB angioplasty for ISR lesions. The major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiac death, target lesion-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization, were assessed. There were no significant differences in each occurrence of MACE and cardiac death: 16 MACEs (61 per 1000 person-years) in the PL-DCB group and 55 (60 per 1000 person-years) MACEs in the SP-DCB group, log-rank p = 0.895, and three cardiac deaths (11 per 1000 person-years) in the PL-DCB group and ten cardiac deaths (11 per 1000 person-years) in the SP-DCB group, log-rank p = 0.849. Diabetes mellitus under insulin treatment [hazard ratio (HR) 2.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-5.60; p = 0.007], chronic kidney disease (HR 1.99; 95% CI 1.01-3.92; p = 0.045), early-onset ISR (HR 1.99; 95% CI 1.18-3.36; p = 0.010), and recurrent ISR (HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.08-3.32; p = 0.026) were associated with the occurrence of MACE after DCB angioplasty. There was no significant difference of MACE between PL-DCB and SP-DCB treatment in patients with ISR. Patients with insulin-treated diabetes, chronic kidney disease, early-onset ISR, and recurrent ISR were at a higher risk of MACE after DCB angioplasty.

A Novel Rabbit Model for In-Stent Neoatherosclerosis.

In-stent neoatherosclerosis is an important problem after percutaneous coronary intervention. To explore the mechanisms and treatment of in-stent neoatherosclerosis, an animal model is needed. To avoid the disadvantages of current animal models, such as excessive use of X-rays and a high mortality rate, we attempted to develop an improved animal model. We explored a method that uses a short time interval to establish a rabbit model of in-stent neoatherosclerosis with a high survival rate and to evaluate its indicators. Sixty rabbits were divided into three equal groups: group A, the traditional method; group B, the standard intervention method; and group C, the improved method. In group C, we made two small incisions in each rabbit's neck, separated the common carotid, punctured it, and implanted a stent. The incision was then sutured. Four weeks later, we used optical coherence tomography (OCT) to scan all rabbits for neoatherosclerosis. We found no significant differences in OCT data between our new animal model and the traditional and interventional groups (P > 0.05). The technological success rate was higher in the new animal model (P < 0.001). We developed a new method to establish an animal model of neoatherosclerosis, which had similar results to the traditional and interventional methods.

Short-Term and Long-Term Efficacy of Drug-Coated Balloon for In-Stent Restenosis in Hemodialysis Patients with Coronary Artery Disease.

The efficacy of drug-coated balloons (DCB) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) in hemodialysis (HD) patients remains unclear.We retrospectively evaluated 153 consecutive patients who underwent DCB for ISR with follow-ups for up to 3 years after the procedure between February 2014 and June 2017. Patients were divided into an HD group (n = 39) and a non-HD group (n = 114). The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoints were all revascularizations and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction and cerebral infarction. Kaplan-Meier curves of survival free from TLR were compared between the two groups. We also performed propensity score matching and then compared the two matched groups (n = 27 in each group). The acute procedure success rate was similar for the two groups (100% versus 99.1%, P = 0.56). The incidence of TLR was higher in the HD group than in the non-HD group (41.0% versus 9.6%, P < 0.0001). The rate of revascularizations and MACE combined was significantly higher in the HD group than in the non-HD group (64.1% versus 17.5%, P < 0.0001). Kaplan-Meier analyses showed that survival free from TLR was significantly lower in the HD group than in the non-HD group both before and after propensity score matching (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.005, respectively; log-rank test).Contrary to the similar acute procedure success, recurrent ISR and MACE occurred more frequently in HD patients than in non-HD patients after DCB, which indicates poorer long-term efficacy of DCB in HD patients.

Comparison of drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloon for the treatment of drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis: A randomized RESTORE trial.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to evaluate the optimal treatment for in-stent restenosis (ISR) of drug-eluting stents (DESs). METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized study comparing the use of drug-eluting balloon (DEB) versus second-generation everolimus-eluting stent for the treatment of DES ISR. The primary end point was in-segment late loss at 9-month routine angiographic follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 172 patients were enrolled, and 74 (43.0%) patients underwent the angiographic follow-up. The primary end point was not different between the 2 treatment groups (DEB group 0.15±0.49 mm vs DES group 0.19±0.41 mm, P=.54). The secondary end points of in-segment minimal luminal diameter (MLD) (1.80±0.69 mm vs 2.09±0.46 mm, P=.03), in-stent MLD (1.90±0.71 mm vs 2.29±0.48 mm, P=.005), in-segment percent diameter stenosis (34%±21% vs 26%±15%, P=.05), and in-stent percent diameter stenosis (33%±21% vs 21%±15%, P=.002) were more favorable in the DES group. The composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization at 1 year was comparable between the 2 groups (DEB group 7.0% vs DES group 4.7%, P=.51). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of DES ISR using DEB or second-generation DES did not differ in terms of late loss at 9-month angiographic follow-up, whereas DES showed better angiographic results regarding minimal MLD and percent diameter stenosis. Both treatment strategies were safe and effective up to 1year after the procedure.

Percutaneous coronary intervention of lesions with in-stent restenosis: A report from the ADAPT-DES study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data from large contemporary cohorts of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) treated with drug-eluting stents (DESs), and no studies have examined the impact of high platelet reactivity (HPR) on the occurrence of ischemic events after ISR percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DESs. We sought to report outcomes after PCI of ISR lesions and its association with HPR. METHODS: Patients in the prospective, multicenter ADAPT-DES study were stratified according to whether they had ISR versus non-ISR PCI. Two-year outcomes were compared between the groups using Cox proportional hazards models. HPR was defined as on-clopidogrel P2Y12 platelet reaction units >208 as measured by the VerifyNow assay; target vessel failure (TVF) was defined as the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Among the 8,582 patients included in the ADAPT-DES study, 840 (9.8%) patients underwent successful ISR PCI. ISR PCI was independently associated with a higher 2-year risk of TVF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.95; 95% CI 1.68-2.27; P<.001) and stent thrombosis (adjusted HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.08-3.51; P=.027) but not bleeding (adjusted HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.73-1.21; P=.64). There was no statistical interaction between HPR and ISR versus non-ISR PCI in regard to TVF (adjusted Pinteraction=.81). CONCLUSIONS: ISR PCI is associated with a considerably higher risk of 2-year adverse ischemic events, with HPR conferring similar risk in ISR and non-ISR PCI. More effective therapeutic strategies for managing ISR lesions are necessary.

Incidence, procedural management, and clinical outcomes of coronary in-stent restenosis: Insights from the National VA CART Program.

BACKROUND: In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a common clinical problem associated with significant morbidity. We sought to evaluate the temporal trends in incidence and procedural management of coronary restenosis as well as evaluate the association between different treatment modalities and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We identified all patients treated for coronary ISR within the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System from October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2014. The temporal trends in incidence as well as intraprocedural management were assessed. Among patients treated for single vessel restenosis, a propensity matched cohort was created for those treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) or other treatment modalities. Target vessel revascularization (TVR) and mortality were compared between the two subpopulations. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2014, 65,443 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and 6,872 patients (10.5%) with 8,921 lesions were treated for ISR. The proportion of patients undergoing revascularization for restenosis increased 0.28% per year (P = 0.055). Among a propensity-matched cohort of 6,231, the rates of TVR (subdistribution HR: 0.623, 95% CI: 0.511-0.760) and mortality (HR: 0.730, 95% CI: 0.641-0.830) were significantly lower among patients treated with a DES compared with other treatments. After adjustment for known risk factors, treatment with DES continued to be associated with a reduction in mortality rate (Adjusted HR: 0.802, 95% CI: 0.704-0.913). CONCLUSIONS: There is a trend toward an increasing proportion of coronary interventions for ISR in a national cohort of Veterans and treatment with a DES is associated with the lowest rate of TVR and overall mortality.

Subadventitial stenting around occluded stents: A bailout technique to recanalize in-stent chronic total occlusions.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of subadventitial stenting (SS) around occluded stents for recanalizing in-stent chronic total occlusions (IS-CTOs). BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on the outcomes of SS for IS-CTO. METHODS: We examined the outcomes of SS for IS-CTO PCI at 14 centers between July 2011 and June 2017, and compared them to historical controls recanalized using within-stent stenting (WSS). Target-vessel failure (TVF) on follow-up was the endpoint of this study, and was defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization. RESULTS: During study period, 422 IS-CTO PCIs were performed, of which 32 (7.6%) were recanalized with SS, usually when conventional approaches failed. The most frequent CTO vessel was the right coronary artery (72%). Mean J-CTO score was 3.1 ± 0.9. SS was antegrade in 53%, and retrograde in 47%. Part of the occluded stent was crushed in 37%, while the whole stent was crushed in 63%. Intravascular imaging was used in 59%. One patient (3.1%) suffered tamponade. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 10/32 patients: stents were patent in six cases, one had mild neointimal hyperplasia, and three had severe restenosis at the SS site. Clinical follow-up was available for 29/32 patients for a mean of 388 ± 303 days. The 24-month incidence of TVF was 13.8%, which was similar to historical controls treated with WSS (19.5%, P = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: SS is rarely performed, usually as last resort, to recanalize complex IS-CTOs. It is associated with favorable acute and mid-term outcomes, but given the small sample size of our study additional research is warranted.

Long-term outcomes after treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis with paclitaxel-coated balloon catheters or everolimus-eluting stents: 3-year follow-up of the TIS clinical study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters (PEB) and drug-eluting stents for treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis (BMS-ISR) have been demonstrated in several studies with follow-up times of 9 to 12 months; however, the long-term outcomes of ISR treatment are less defined. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the long-term efficacy of PEB and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for the treatment of BMS-ISR. METHODS: We analyzed 3-year clinical follow-up data from patients included in the TIS randomized clinical study. A total of 136 patients with BMS-ISR were allocated to receive treatment with either PEB or EES (68 patients with 74 ISR lesions per group). RESULTS: The PEB and EES groups did not significantly differ in major adverse cardiac events-free survival (MACE; P = .211; including individual events: CV death: P = .622; myocardial infarction: P = .650 or target vessel revascularization: P = .286) at 3-year clinical follow-up. No event-free survival differences were found between the groups regarding overall mortality (P = .818), definite stent thrombosis (P = .165) or the second MACE (P = .270). CONCLUSIONS: At the 3-year follow-up, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between iopromide-coated PEB and EES for the treatment of BMS-ISR. (ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01735825).

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus everolimus-eluting stents or drug eluting balloon for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: 1-Year follow-up of a propensity score matching comparison (the BIORESOLVE-ISR Study).

OBJECTIVES: to compare the 1-year outcome between bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS), everolimus-eluting stent (EES), and drug-eluting balloon (DEB) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment. BACKGROUND: BVS has been proposed as alternative for ISR treatment. To date a direct comparison between BVS and DES or DEB for ISR treatment is lacking. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all ISR lesions treated with BVS, DEB, and EES from January 2012 to December 2014. A total of 548 lesions (498 patients) were included. By applying two propensity-score matching, 93 lesions treated with BVS were compared with 93 lesions treated with DEB, and 100 lesions treated with BVS were compared to 100 lesions treated with EES. RESULTS: At 1-year follow-up the incidence of device-oriented cardiovascular events (DOCE) and its components did not significantly differ between BVS and DEB (DOCE: 10.9 vs. 11.8%, HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.33-2.52; P = 0.86; Cardiac death: 2.2 vs. 1.2%, HR, 1.74, 95% CI 0.16-18.80, P = 0.65; ID-TLR: 8.9 vs. 10.7%, HR, 0.81, 95% CI 0.27-2.48, P = 0.71; TV-MI: 3.3 vs. 1.2%, HR, 2.39, 95% CI 0.27-21.32, P = 0.43) and BVS vs. EES (DOCE: 10.1 vs. 5.2% HR, 1.81, 95% CI, 0.63-5.25; P = 0.27; Cardiac death: 3.0 vs. 1.1%; HR, 2.83, 95% CI 0.29-27.4, P = 0.37; ID-TLR: 7.2 vs. 4.2%, HR, 1.57, 95% CI 0.47-5.23, P = 0.46; TV-MI: 3.1 vs. 0%). CONCLUSION: At 1-year follow-up the use of BVS as ISR treatment is associated with a higher, even if not significant, DOCE rate compared with EES while a similar rate compared to DEB.