Long term outcome after treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions using three different drug coated balloons

Drug Coated Balloon in the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Narrative Review

Drug coated balloons (DCBs) are currently indicated in guidelines as a first choice option in the management of instant restenosis, whereas their use in de novo lesions is still debated. The concerns raised after the contrasting results of the initial trials with DCBs in de novo lesions have been more recently overcome by a larger amount of data confirming their safety and effectiveness as compared to drug-eluting stents (DES), with potentially greater benefits being achieved, especially in particular anatomical settings, as in very small or large vessels and bifurcations, but also in selected subsets of higher-risk patients, where a 'leave nothing behind' strategy could offer a reduction of the inflammatory stimulus and thrombotic risk. The present review aims at providing an overview of current available DCB devices and their indications of use based on the results of data achieved so far.

Clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has a well-established role in revascularization for coronary artery disease. We performed network meta-analysis to provide evidence on optimal intervention strategies for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries.

Materials and methods

Enrolled studies were randomized clinical trials that compared different intervention strategies [balloon angioplasty (BA), biolimus-coated balloon (BCB), bare-metal stent (BMS), new-generation drug-eluting stent (New-DES), older generation sirolimus-eluting stent (Old-SES), paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB), and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES)] for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

Results

A total of 23 randomized clinical trials comparing seven intervention devices were analyzed. In terms of the primary outcome, New-DES was the intervention device with the best efficacy [surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), 89.1%; mean rank, 1.7], and the Old-SES [risk ratio (RR), 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45–2.64] and PCB (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.72–2.74) secondary to New-DES, but there was no statistically significant difference between these three intervention devices. All DES and PCB were superior to BMS and BA for MACE in both primary and sensitivity analysis. For secondary outcomes, there was no association between all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) with any intervention strategy, and additionally, the findings of target lesion revascularization (TLR) were similar to the primary outcomes.

Conclusion

Paclitaxel-coated balloon yielded similar outcomes to New-DES for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries. Therefore, this network meta-analysis may provide potential support for PCB as a feasible, effective, and safe alternative intervention strategy for the revascularization of small coronary arteries.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails], identifier [CRD42022338433].

Long-Term Outcomes With Drug-Eluting Balloon for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis and De Novo Lesions: The Novara-Biella-Trento (NOBITRE) Registry

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have emerged for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) of in-stent restenosis or particular anatomical subsets. We provide a real-world analysis of the prognostic determinants and long-term outcomes of patients treated with DCB for any lesion in a comprehensive multicenter registry. The primary study endpoint was the occurrence of major cardiovascular events (MACE: composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) at the longest available follow-up. We included 267 patients (196 treated for in-stent restenosis and 71 for de novo lesions), with a median follow-up of 616 [368–1025] days. MACE occurred in 70 (26.2%) of the patients and related with higher rates of in-stent restenosis (P = .04), longer and more type C lesions ( P = .05 and P = .04). At multivariate Cox-regression, type C lesions emerged as the only independent predictor of MACE (adjusted OR [95% CI] = 1.83[1.13–2.97], P = .014), mainly driven by target vessel revascularization (adjusted OR[95% CI] = 1.78[1.05–2.95], P = .03) not conditioning survival. In-stent restenosis emerged as major determinant of TLF (adjusted OR[95% CI] = 2.59[1.17–5.75], P = .02). DCBs represent a treatment option for any lesion; however, type C and restenotic lesions are associated with an increased risk of MACE and target lesion failure, where the optimal strategies for patients’ selection and lesion preparation are still undefined.