Prognostic Impact of Drug-Coated Balloons in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: A Propensity-Matched Study

Drug-coated balloons in high-risk patients and diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of 10 studies

BACKGROUND

Despite the improvements in drug eluting stents (DES) technology, suboptimal results have been observed in certain higher-risk subsets of patients, as in diabetes mellitus (DM). Drug-coated balloons (DCB) could represent an alternative to DES in complex populations and anatomies, as in DM.

AIMS

The present meta-analysis aimed at assessing the role of DCBs in patients with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Studies comparing DCB versus percutaneous coronary revascularization (PCI) with/without DES for PCI in high-risk populations (>30% DM) were included. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall mortality, secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

RESULTS

We included 10 studies, comprising 2026 patients. Among them, 1002 patients (49.5%) were treated with DCB and 1024 with DES implantation. Among the included studies, 6 only enrolled diabetic patients and 2 had a prevalence of diabetes of 50%. At a mean follow-up of 15.3 months, mortality rate was 3.8% (82 patients), significantly lower with DCB (3.2% vs. 4.9% with DES; odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval {CI}] = 0.61 [0.38, 0.97], p = 0.04 phet = 0.34. A similar reduction in favor of DCB was observed for MACE (13.6% vs. 17.6%; OR [95% CI] = 0.79 [0.61, 1.04], p = 0.09, phet = 0.25), while TLR was significantly reduced only in the diabetic-restricted sub-analysis.

CONCLUSION

In the present meta-analysis, we showed a significant survival benefit and an absolute reduction in MACE and TLR with a DCB-based strategy as compared to DES in high-risk patients, mostly with DM. Future large-scale randomized trials, dedicated to this population, are deserved to confirm our findings.

WHAT IS KNOWN

Complex coronary anatomies and diabetes mellitus (DM) represent the pitfall of drug eluting stents (DES), mainly due to inflammatory and thrombotic complications, which should be reduced with drug-coated balloons (DCB).

WHAT IS NEW

We confirmed a significant advantage of DCB versus DES in the treatment of de novo lesions in high-risk patients and mainly in DM, reducing overall mortality, MACE and target lesion revascularization.

Contemporary Use of Drug-Coated Balloons for Coronary Angioplasty: A Comprehensive Review

The interventional treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) has undergone significant improvements thanks to technological innovations. Nowadays, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is the standard of care for the treatment of CAD. Nevertheless, the non-negligible incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and suboptimal results in various anatomical settings has led to the development of drug-coated balloons (DCBs). DCBs are catheter-based balloons whose surface is coated with an anti-proliferative drug (mainly Paclitaxel or Sirolimus) loaded onto the balloon surface with different technologies and dose concentrations. In the beginning, these devices were used for the treatment of ISR showing an excellent efficacy profile in the inhibition of intimal hyperplasia. Subsequently, several studies evaluated their use in other angiographical and clinical contexts such as de novo lesions, small vessel disease, diffuse coronary disease, bifurcation lesions, acute coronary syndromes, high-bleeding risk and diabetic patients. This comprehensive review aims to describe the main DCB platforms on the market, their fields of application with the main supporting studies and their future perspectives.

Drug-Eluting Balloons and Drug-Eluting Stents in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Due to Restenosis-DM-Dragon Registry

Background: The rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is decreasing; however, it is still a challenge for contemporary invasive cardiologists. Therapeutic methods, including drug-eluting balloons (DEBs), intravascular lithotripsy, excimer laser coronary atherectomy, and imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES), have been implemented. Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are burdened with a higher risk of ISR than the general population. Aims: DM-Dragon is aimed at evaluating the clinical outcomes of ISR treatment with DEBs vs. DES, focusing on patients with co-existing diabetes mellitus. Methods: The DM-Dragon registry is a retrospective study comprising data from nine high-volume PCI centers in Poland. A total of 1117 patients, of whom 473 individuals had DM and were treated with PCI due to ISR, were included. After propensity-score matching (PSM), 198 pairs were created for further analysis. The primary outcome of the study was target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: In DM patients after PSM, TLR occurred in 21 (10.61%) vs. 20 (10.1%) in non-diabetic patients, p = 0.8690. Rates of target vessel revascularization (TVR), target vessel myocardial infarction, device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE), and cardiac death did not differ significantly. Among diabetic patients, the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the DEB group (2.78% vs. 11.11%, HR 3.67 (95% confidence interval, CI) [1.01-13.3), p = 0.0483). Conclusions: PCI with DEBs is almost as effective as DES implantation in DM patients treated for ISR. In DM-Dragon, the rate of all-cause death was significantly lower in patients treated with DEBs. Further large-scale, randomized clinical trials would be needed to support these findings.