Cutting balloon angioplasty vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in patients receiving intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

Current Management of In-Stent Restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the primary cause of target lesion failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), resulting in 10-year incidences of target lesion revascularization at a rate of approximately 20%. The treatment of ISR is challenging due to its inherent propensity for recurrence and varying susceptibility to available strategies, influenced by a complex interplay between clinical and lesion-specific conditions. Given the multiple mechanisms contributing to the development of ISR, proper identification of the underlying substrate, especially by using intravascular imaging, becomes pivotal as it can indicate distinct therapeutic requirements. Among standalone treatments, drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been the most effective. The main advantage of a DCB-based approach is the avoidance of an additional metallic layer, which may otherwise enhance neointimal hyperplasia, provide the substratum for developing neoatherosclerosis, and expose the patient to a persistently higher risk of coronary ischemic events. On the other hand, target vessel scaffolding by DES implantation confers relevant mechanical advantages over DCB angioplasty, generally resulting in larger luminal gain, while drug elution from the stent surface ensures the inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. Nevertheless, repeat stenting with DES also implies an additional permanent metallic layer that may reiterate and promote the mechanisms leading to ISR. Against this background, the selection of either DCB or DES on a patient- and lesion-specific basis as well as the implementation of adjuvant treatments, including cutting/scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy, and rotational atherectomy, hold the potential to improve the effectiveness of ISR treatment over time. In this review, we comprehensively assessed the available evidence from randomized trials to define contemporary interventional treatment of ISR and provide insights for future directions.

Management of in-stent restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the most common cause of stent failure after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent data suggest that ISR-PCI accounts for 5-10% of all PCI procedures performed in current clinical practice. This State-of-the-Art review will primarily focus on the management of ISR but will begin by briefly discussing diagnosis and classification. We then move on to detail the evidence base underpinning the various therapeutic strategies for ISR before finishing with a proposed ISR management algorithm based on current scientific data.

Current treatment of in-stent restenosis

Management of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains an important clinical problem. Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have drastically reduced the incidence of ISR, treatment of DES-ISR is particularly challenging. ISR mainly results from aggressive neointimal proliferation, but recent data also suggest that neoatherosclerosis may play an important pathophysiological role. Intracoronary imaging provides unique insights to unravel the underlying substrate of ISR and may be used to guide repeated interventions. In this paper, we systematically reviewed clinical trial data with currently available therapeutic modalities, including DES and drug-coated balloons, in patients presenting with ISR within bare-metal stents or DES.

Clinical outcome of patients undergoing low aggressive angioplasty combined with brachytherapy and short-term dual antiplatelet therapy for in-stent restenosis

OBJECTIVE

The impact of vessel injury on the outcome of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention combined with brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis is under investigation. We report our clinical experience adopting a low aggressive balloon angioplasty technique, to limit vessel trauma, associated with brachytherapy and short-term dual antiplatelet therapy.

METHODS

Forty-nine consecutive patients, undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with brachytherapy for symptomatic in-stent restenosis, were prospectively observed for a median time of 21 + or - 8 months. Clinical follow-up included anginal status, death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization; only patients with evidence of ischaemia repeated coronary angiography. Low aggressive angioplasty consisted in the use of a conventional balloon with a balloon to artery ratio < or = 1, avoiding high inflation pressures and the use of other devices. Dual antiplatelet therapy was continued for 3-6 months.

RESULTS

Early angiographic result was good and the need for additional stent implantation was low (3.9%). At follow-up, we did not observe death, acute myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis, but 10 patients repeated coronary angiography for recurrence of ischaemia: disease progression was present in two cases (4.1%). Restenosis emerged in the remaining eight patients (16.3%): two cases showed restenosis within the target lesion segment, one case within the injured segment, one case within the radiated segment, and four cases at the edges. The consequent new revascularization was surgical in three patients and percutaneous in seven patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that low aggressive angioplasty followed by brachytherapy and short-term dual antiplatelet therapy for in-stent restenosis is related to a good outcome, with a low restenosis rate and without stent thrombosis.

Cutting balloons for the treatment of vascular stenoses

The aim of this article is to review the mechanism, technical characteristics, biological response and clinical applications of cutting balloon angioplasty in peripheral vessels. The cutting balloon is a non-compliant, balloon catheter equipped with three-to-four microtome-sharp atherotomes. When used appropriately, it is safe and easy to use, with a high immediate success rate and few complications, provided oversizing is avoided. There is some evidence that pre-dilation with a standard or high-pressure balloon may also predispose to vascular rupture. The cutting balloon has proved to be beneficial in treating difficult complex lesions in the coronary arteries. Early experience in non-coronary vessels shows that cutting balloon angioplasty can be used to treat peripheral bypass anastomotic and haemodialysis fistula stenoses that are resistant to conventional high-inflation pressures. Its application in de novo peripheral arterial lesions and non-coronary in-stent restenosis is still under discussion. Theoretically, this device induces a smaller degree of vessel wall injury localised to the area of incisions and sparing the interincisional segments; however, this postulated reduction in restenosis rates has not been confirmed in clinical practice.

Angiographic and clinical outcomes at 8 months of cutting balloon angioplasty and beta-brachytherapy for native vessel in-stent restenosis (BETACUT): results from a stopped randomized controlled trial

The objective of this study was to assess angiographic and clinical outcomes of cutting balloon (CB) angioplasty and concomitant Sr/Y-90 beta-brachytherapy as a treatment modality for patients with native vessel in-stent restenosis (ISR). Procedural advantages over the standard balloon (SB) have been claimed for the CB. Intracoronary brachytherapy preceded by SB angioplasty is regarded as the treatment of choice in patients with ISR. In an interim analysis of a prospective randomized trial designed for 652 patients, 100 consecutive patients with ISR were assigned to treatment with SB angioplasty (n = 51) or CB angioplasty (n = 49), followed in either case by Sr/Y-90 beta-brachytherapy. Quantitative coronary angiography at baseline, postintervention, and at 8 months was performed by an independent central laboratory. More than 90% of target lesions in the overall patient population were diffuse, with 14% of stents totally occluded. Procedural parameters and immediate angiographic outcomes were essentially the same in either study arm. At 8 months, no statistically significant differences were observed in recurrent angiographic restenosis (SB = 26.1%; CB = 29.5%; P = 0.82), target lesion revascularizations (SB = 13.7%; CB = 8.2%; P = 0.53), and major adverse cardiac events (SB = 15.7%; CB = 8.2%; P = 0.36). In this interim analysis, there was no indication of a beneficial effect of CB use over SB use in terms of angiographic or clinical outcomes at 8-month follow-up. CB angioplasty appears to be as safe and efficacious as SB angioplasty in beta-radiation treatment of patients with predominantly diffuse native vessel ISR. It was decided to discontinue the trial.