Back to Search Start Over

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

Authors :
Kawamoto H
Ruparelia N
Latib A
Miyazaki T
Sato K
Mangieri A
Contri R
Stella S
Figini F
Chieffo A
Carlino M
Montorfano M
Colombo A
Source :
JACC. Cardiovascular interventions [JACC Cardiovasc Interv] 2015 Oct; Vol. 8 (12), pp. 1586-94. Date of Electronic Publication: 2015 Sep 17.
Publication Year :
2015

Abstract

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).<br />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.<br />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).<br />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.<br />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.<br /> (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1876-7605
Volume :
8
Issue :
12
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
JACC. Cardiovascular interventions
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
26386758
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2015.04.032