A multicenter randomized comparison of drug-eluting balloon plus bare-metal stent versus bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in bifurcation lesions treated with a single-stenting technique: Six-month angiographic and 12-month clinical results of th

Drug-eluting balloons in the treatment of de-novo coronary lesions: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

AIM

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) plus bare-metal stents (BMS) for the treatment of de-novo coronary lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Eleven trials involving 1279 patients were included in this study. The main endpoints were as follows: late lumen loss (LLL), binary restenosis, stent thrombosis (ST), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). The definition of MACEs was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Compared with BMS alone, DEB plus BMS showed a lower risk for LLL (P=0.007) and MACEs (P=0.010). There were no significant differences in binary restenosis (P=0.212), ST (P=0.199), death (P=0.141), MI (P=0.439), and TLR (P=0.340). Compared with drug-eluting stents (DES), DEB plus BMS could increase the risk of LLL (P=0.002) and MACEs (P=0.026). The risks of binary restenosis (P=0.113), ST (P=0.832), death (P=0.115), MI (P=0.831), and TLR (P=0.111) were similar between DEB plus BMS and DES.

CONCLUSION

DEB plus BMS was better than BMS alone in reducing LLL and MACEs, especially when dilatation was performed after stenting for de-novo coronary lesions, but it was inferior to DES. Therefore, the treatment strategy with DEB plus BMS should not be recommended for de-novo coronary lesions, except for patients who have contraindications for DES.

An update on the clinical use of drug-coated balloons in percutaneous coronary interventions

INTRODUCTION

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) promise to deliver anti-proliferative drugs and prevent restenosis leaving nothing behind. Although, randomized clinical trials have demonstrated their efficacy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis, clinical evidence supporting their use in other coronary applications is still lacking.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the development status of clinically available DCB technologies and provides an update on the current data for their coronary use.

EXPERT OPINION

Current generation DCB prevent restenosis by delivering paclitaxel particles on the surface of the vessel wall. Although clinically available technologies share a common mechanism of action, important differences in pharmacokinetic behavior and safety profiles do exist. Future technological improvements include the development of coatings displaying: high transfer efficiency; low particle embolization potential; and alternative drug formulations. Optimized balloon-based delivery systems and drug encapsulation technologies also promise to improve the technical limitations of current generation DCB. Although proving clinical superiority against DES may prove to be difficult in mainstream applications (i.e., de novo), new generation DCB technologies have the potential to achieve a strong position in the interventional field in clinical settings in which the efficacy of DES use is not proven or justified (i.e., bifurcations).

Stenting and Adjunctive Delivery of Paclitaxel Via Balloon Coating Versus Durable Polymeric Matrix for De Novo Coronary Lesions: Clinical and Angiographic Results from the Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

There is limited comparative clinical data regarding the safety and efficacy profile of paclitaxel delivery via balloon versus stent-polymer matrix. In this study, we aimed to compare the clinical and angiographic results of two different methods of paclitaxel delivery among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for single de novo coronary lesions.

METHODS

A total of 202 patients undergoing PCI due to symptomatic heart disease and at least one significant coronary artery lesion were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter non-inferiority trial. Eligible patients were randomized to a revascularization with either a paclitaxel eluting stent (PES = Coroflex Please, B.Braun) or a bare metal stent (BMS) followed by a paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) dilation (BMS = Coroflex + PCB = Sequent Please, B.Braun). Clinical follow-up was obtained at 9 months in all patients, whereas angiographic in a subset of 94 (46.5%) patients.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. At 9 months, the primary endpoint of in-stent late lumen loss in BMS + PCB was comparable and non-inferior to PES (0.21 ± 0.5 vs. 0.30 ± 0.7 mm, respectively. P(non-inf)  < 0.05). At 9 months, the incidence of MACE (7.0 vs. 6.9%, HR = 1, 95%CI: 0.3-2.8; P = 0.99), comprising the occurrence of myocardial infarction (4.9 vs. 3.0%, HR = 1.62, 95%CI: 0.4-6.5; P = 0.32), target lesion revascularization (6.9 vs. 5.0%, HR = 1.42, 95%CI: 0.4-4.4; p = 0.54) and stent thrombosis (4.9 vs. 3.0%, HR = 2.01, 95%CI: 0.5-7.4; P = 0.74) was comparable between BMS + PCB and PES, respectively. In the BMS + PCB group, thrombosis tended to occur within 30 days (3.9 vs. 1.0%; P = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Paclitaxel delivery via drug coated balloon or polymer-stent matrix achieved comparable angiographic and clinical results among patients with de novo coronary lesions. BMS + PCB revascularization was associated with a higher rate of stent thrombosis when compared to newer generation drug eluting stents, therefore, should be recommended as a bail-out for PCB alone angioplasty.

Paclitaxel-eluting balloon and everolimus-eluting stent for provisional stenting of coronary bifurcations: 12-month results of the multicenter BIOLUX-I study

BACKGROUND

Several studies investigated the combination of bare metal stents in the main branch and drug-eluting balloons in the side branch in bifurcation lesions, but data on the combination of drug-eluting stents and drug-eluting balloons are scarce. We aim to assess the feasibility of provisional stenting with an everolimus-eluting stent in the main branch and a paclitaxel-eluting balloon in the side branch.

METHODS

In this prospective, multi-center study conducted in 5 Australian sites, 35 patients with bifurcation lesions were enrolled. Angiographic and intravascular ultrasound assessments were conducted at 9 months; clinical follow-up was conducted until 12 months.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint, late lumen loss in the side branch measured by quantitative coronary angiography, was 0.10±0.43mm. No binary restenosis was observed. One patient died; 3 myocardial infarctions (one suspected and two in non-target vessels) and one target lesion revascularization occurred. No probable or definite stent thrombosis was observed.

CONCLUSION

The combination of an everolimus-eluting stent in the main branch and a paclitaxel-eluting balloon in the side branch appears to be a safe, effective and novel treatment option for bifurcation lesions.

Progress in interventional cardiology: challenges for the future

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the western and developing countries. Percutaneous transluminal coronary interventions have become the most prevalent treatment option for coronary artery disease; however, due to serious complications, such as stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis (ISR), the efficacy and safety of the procedure remain important issues to address. Strategies to overcome these aspects are under extensive investigation. In this review, we summarise relevant milestones during the time to overcome these limitations of coronary stents, such as the development of polymer-free drug-eluting stents (DES) to avoid pro-inflammatory response due to the polymer coating or the developement of stents with cell-directing drugs to, simultaneously, improve re-endothelialisation and inhibit ISR amongst other techniques most recently developed, which have not fully entered the clinical stage. Also the novel concept of fully biodegradable DES featured by the lack of a permanent foreign body promises to be a beneficial and applicable tool to restore a natural vessel with maintained vasomotion and to enable optional subsequent surgical revascularisation.

The current status of drug-coated balloons in percutaneous coronary and peripheral interventions

Through continued innovation, percutaneous treatment of coronary and peripheral stenoses has evolved rapidly since balloon angioplasty was first introduced three decades ago. Significant advances were made with the introduction of bare metal stents and subsequently drug-eluting stents, which expanded the possibility of successful revascularisation in complicated lesions. Despite these advantages, efforts are still ongoing to improve patient outcomes further. In recent years, drug-coated balloons have emerged as an exciting technology developed to overcome the limitations faced by drug-eluting stents, such as stent thrombosis and dependency on prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, and may prove efficacious in complex subsets such as small vessels and diffuse lesions where stent results are suboptimal. Several drug-coated balloons developed for coronary and peripheral applications were evaluated recently in preclinical and clinical studies with encouraging results. Drug-coated balloons have proven effective in treating in-stent restenosis; however, there is accumulating evidence on their utility in other clinical scenarios. We present a timely review of the mechanisms of action, key preclinical studies, emerging clinical indications, current clinical trial results, and future perspectives of this novel drug-coated balloon technology as it seeks to establish its role in percutaneous intervention.

Stent healing response following delivery of paclitaxel via durable polymeric matrix versus iopromide-based balloon coating in the familial hypercholesterolaemic swine model of coronary injury

AIMS

The routine use of paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) in combination with bare metal stents (BMS) in de novo coronary lesions has been questioned. In this study, we aimed to compare the vascular response of BMS implanted using a second-generation PCB (BMS+PCB) with the TAXUS stent (PES) and a BMS control (BMS) in the familial hypercholesterolaemic swine (FHS) model of coronary injury.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 17 stents (PES=6, BMS+PCB=6, and BMS=5) were implanted in the coronary territory of 10 FHS using a 20% overstretch injury ratio. Imaging evaluation (QCA and IVUS) was conducted in all animals at baseline and 28 days following stent implantation. Following terminal imaging all animals were euthanised and stented coronary segments harvested for histological evaluation. At 28 days, the lowest degree of percentage diameter stenosis by QCA was achieved by the PES (2.9 ± 9%) followed by the BMS+PCB (9.5 ± 16.4%) and the BMS group (25.65 ± 18.7%, p<0.05). In histology, percentage area of stenosis (BMS+PCB=29.6 ± 6.4% vs. PES=21.5 ± 3.3% vs. BMS=55.2 ± 12.9%; p<0.01) and neointimal thickness (BMS+PCB=0.26 ± 0.1 mm vs. PES=0.21 ± 0.1 mm vs. BMS=0.59 ± 0.2 mm; p<0.01) were significantly reduced in both paclitaxel groups in comparison to BMS controls. Both BMS+PCB and BMS groups had higher endothelialisation scores (PES=1.50 ± 0.9 vs. BMS+PCB=2.73 ± 0.4 vs. BMS=3.00; p<0.05) and lower peri-strut inflammatory scores (PES=0.83 ± 0.4 vs. BMS+PCB=0.20 ± 0.2 vs. BMS=0.43 ± 0.6, p<0.05) when compared to PES. Neointima maturity (PCB+BMS: 2.00 [2-2.4] vs. PES: 1.00 [0.3-1] vs. BMS: 3.00, p<0.05) and fibrin deposition (PCB+BMS: 1.40 ± 0.3 vs. PES: 2.17 ± 0.7 vs. BMS: 0.27 ± 0.3, p<0.05) scores in PCB+BMS appeared to fall between the PES and the BMS ranges.

CONCLUSIONS

In the FHS coronary injury model, BMS implantation using a PCB yields a degree of neointimal inhibition comparable to the PES. The BMS+PCB combination presented lower degrees of inflammation and fibrin deposition; however, signs of delayed healing were still present.

No indication for an unexpected high rate of coronary artery aneurysms after angioplasty with drug-coated balloons

AIMS

Coronary artery aneurysms (CAA) are a rare complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and are reported with an incidence of 0.6% to 3.9%. While in recent years the use of paclitaxel drug-coated balloons (DCB) has increased, so far no CAA formation after DCB intervention has been reported.

METHODS AND RESULTS

During the years 2010 and 2011 we used DCBs in 704 PCIs. Follow-up angiography was scheduled at four months in all patients and has so far been achieved in 380 PCIs. In three patients we found development of a CAA at the former PCI site within four months of observation. Aneurysm length varied between 8.4 mm and 13 mm and lumina increased 58% to 131%. Retrospectively all patients with CAA development showed small intimal dissection partially with tiny persisting contrast bands parallel to the lumen according to type B and type C of the NHLBI classification after PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

CAA formation after DCB intervention was found in three out of 380 PCIs with DCB, consistent with an incidence of 0.8%. Thus, PCI with DCB does not cause an unexpectedly high rate of coronary artery aneurysms.

Drug eluting balloons for de novo coronary lesions - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) is unclear. Increasing evidence has shown a benefit for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Its effect on de novo coronary lesions is more controversial. Several smaller randomized trials found conflicting results.

METHODS

This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the effect of local Paclitaxel delivery/drug eluting balloons (DEB) (+/- bare metal stent) compared to current standard therapy (stenting) to treat de novo coronary lesions. Data sources for RCT were identified through a literature search from 2005 through 28 December 2012. The main endpoints of interest were target lesion revascularization (TLR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), binary in-segment restenosis, stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI), late lumen loss (LLL) and mortality. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eight studies (11 subgroups) and a total of 1,706 patients were included in this analysis. Follow-up duration ranged from 6 to 12 months. Overall, DEB showed similar results to the comparator treatment. The relative risk (RR) for MACE was 0.95 (0.64 to 1.39); P = 0.776, for mortality it was 0.79 (0.30 to 2.11), P = 0.644, for stent thrombosis it was 1.45 (0.42 to 5.01), P = 0.560, for MI it was 1.26 (0.49 to 3.21), P = 0.629, for TLR it was 1.09 (0.71 to 1.68); P = 0.700 and for binary in-stent restenosis it was 0.96 (0.48 to 1.93), P = 0.918. Compared to bare metal stents (BMS), DEB showed a lower LLL (- 0.26 mm (-0.51 to 0.01)) and a trend towards a lower MACE risk (RR 0.66 (0.43 to 1.02)).

CONCLUSION

Overall, drug-eluting balloons (+/- bare metal stent) are not superior to current standard therapies (BMS or drug eluting stent (DES)) in treating de novo coronary lesions. However, the performance of DEB seems to lie in between DES and BMS with a trend towards superiority over BMS alone. Therefore, DEB may be considered in patients with contraindications for DES. The heterogeneity between the included studies is a limitation of this meta-analysis; different drug-eluting balloons have been used.

Comparison of a drug-eluting balloon first and then bare metal stent with a drug-eluting stent for treatment of de novo lesions: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background

The use of a drug-eluting balloon for the treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions remains to be evaluated. A previous trial in patients with stable and unstable angina comparing a bare metal stent mounted on a drug-eluting balloon with a sirolimus-eluting stent failed to meet the prespecified non-inferiority criteria versus the sirolimus-eluting stent. The stent struts of a bare metal stent pre-mounted on a drug-eluting balloon may prevent the appropriate delivery of drugs to the vessel wall and may result in reduced efficacy. In the present study we will therefore evaluate the efficacy of a drug-eluting balloon for treating de novo coronary artery lesions using a strategy designed to uniformly deliver drug to the vessel with a bare metal stent.

Methods/Design

The Comparison of Drug-Eluting Balloon first study is a prospective, randomized, open-label trial designed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of first using a drug-eluting balloon (Sequent^® please; B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) followed by a bare metal stent (Coroflex^® Blue; B. Braun) compared with using a drug-eluting stent (Resolute Integrity™; Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA) for de novo coronary artery lesions. The primary endpoint of the study is in-segment late loss at 9 months measured by quantitative coronary angiography. Secondary endpoints include angiographic findings such as angiographic success, device success, binary angiographic restenosis, and clinical outcomes such as procedural success, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis. A total of 180 patients will be enrolled in the study.

Discussion

The Comparison of Drug-Eluting Balloon first study will evaluate the clinical efficacy, angiographic outcomes and safety of a drug-eluting balloon first followed by a bare metal stent compared with a drug-eluting stent for the treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials.gov: NCT01539603

Drug-coated balloons in treatment of in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Background

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have been developed for the percutaneous treatment of coronary artery disease. An initial focus has been the management of in-stent restenosis (ISR) but randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been small and powered only for angiographic endpoints.

Objective

The aim of the work was to assess the clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated for ISR with DCB versus control (balloon angioplasty or drug-eluting stents) by a meta-analysis of RCTs.

Methods

A comprehensive search was performed of RCTs where patients with ISR were randomly assigned to either DCB or alternative coronary intervention. Outcome measurements were death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularisation (TLR), binary definition of restenosis and in-lesion late luminal loss (LLL).

Results

Four studies were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for patients treated for ISR (n = 399). Mean follow-up duration was 14.5 months. DCBs were associated with lower rates of TLR [8.8 vs. 29.7 % OR (95 % confidence interval, CI) 0.20 (0.11–0.36), p < 0.0001], binary restenosis [10.3 vs. 41.3 % OR (95 % CI) 0.13 (0.07–0.24), p < 0.00001] and MI [0.5 vs. 3.8 %, OR (95 % CI) 0.21 (0.04–1.00), p = 0.05]. No significant heterogeneity was identified.

Conclusion

Drug-coated balloons appear to be effective versus control in reducing TLR and possibly MI versus balloon angioplasty or drug-eluting stents in the management of ISR.

Six-month clinical outcomes of the Tryton Side Branch Stent for the treatment of bifurcation lesions

AIMS

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of a bifurcation lesion (BL) is still associated with poorer clinical outcomes when compared with PCI of a non-BL. Therefore, several dedicated coronary bifurcation stents, such as the Tryton Side Branch Stent™ (Tryton Medical, Durham, NC, USA), were developed to improve clinical outcomes. We investigated 6-month clinical outcomes after placement of a Tryton stent in 91 patients treated for 93 BLs in our centre.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All consecutive patients who have undergone PCI of a BL treated with the Tryton stent in our centre were included. Outcomes were defined as any death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), any revascularisation, ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation (TVR), ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR), stent thrombosis, and target vessel failure (TVF; composite of cardiac death, MI, and ischaemia-driven TVR). Event rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Thirty-eight (42 %) patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were included (16 % ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI)). The 6-month event rates were 5.4 % (death), 4.3 % (cardiac death), 2.2 % (MI), 4.5 % (any revascularisation), 4.5 % (TVR), 4.5 % (TLR) and 9.7 % (TVF).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world all-comers single-centre registry, the use of the Tryton Side Branch Stent was associated with acceptable procedural and promising clinical outcomes at 6 months, including ACS and STEMI patients.