Paclitaxel-eluting balloons, paclitaxel-eluting stents, and balloon angioplasty in patients with restenosis after implantation of a drug-eluting stent (ISAR-DESIRE 3): a randomised, open-label trial

Prospective randomized single-blind multicenter study to assess the safety and effectiveness of the SELUTION SLR 014 drug eluting balloon in the treatment of subjects with in-stent restenosis: Rationale and design

BACKGROUND

Repeat drug-eluting stenting is superior to balloon angioplasty for prevention of recurrent in-stent restenosis (ISR), but carries a potential disadvantage of multiple layers of stent. The safety and effectiveness of a sirolimus drug-eluting balloon as an alternative has not been assessed.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The SELUTION4ISR trial is a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. A total of 418 subjects with bare metal or drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR with up to 2 previous stent procedures at the target lesion, lesion length <26 mm and reference diameter ≥2.0 mm - ≤4.5 mm will be randomized 1:1 to treatment with either the SELUTION SLR™ DEB (SLR DEB) or standard of care (SOC), which includes either repeat DES or balloon angioplasty without drug coating. A subset of subjects will undergo planned angiographic and optical coherence tomography follow-up. The primary endpoint will be target lesion failure, defined as cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months follow-up. The study will sequentially assess noninferiority of the SLR DEB to SOC in the overall cohort, followed by noninferiority then superiority of the SLR DEB to DES in the cohort with only 1 previous stent at the target lesion.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04280029).

CURRENT STATUS

The trial completed enrollment in July 2024.

CONCLUSION

The SELUTION4ISR study will evaluate the safety and effectiveness of SLR DEB in a prospective, randomized, international, multicenter trial for treatment of coronary ISR.

Expanding indications for drug-coated balloons in coronary artery disease

INTRODUCTION

Despite technical advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and new iterations of drug-eluting stents (DES), complications still occur, including stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis (ISR). Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) provide a promising option for the treatment of coronary lesions - particularly when DES are undesirable or contraindicated - allowing for PCI without the implantation of metallic devices, thus adhering to the 'leave nothing behind' principle.

AREAS COVERED

A comprehensive literature search has been performed on PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane, up to November 2024, with no significant restrictions. This article provides an overview of available DCB and summarizes the evidence supporting their use in different settings, including ISR, small-vessel disease, de novo large-vessel disease, and bifurcations.

EXPERT OPINION

Trials of DCB are heterogeneous with respect to population, sample size, follow-up, anatomical pattern, and device used. Furthermore, they usually have limited statistical power for clinical endpoints. Based on current knowledge, DES may be preferrable for DES-ISR, de novo lesions in large vessels and for the treatment of the main branch in true bifurcations, with DCB approved for small-vessel disease and selected ISR lesions. Ongoing trials are expected to provide definitive insights into the efficacy and safety of DCB in different scenarios.

Drug-coated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis: A prospective observational study

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) and sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).

METHODS

This prospective, observational, single-centre pilot study enrolled 85 patients diagnosed with drug-eluting stent ISR. For all the eligible patients, various clinical baseline characteristics were collected, and angiography was performed to evaluate the lesion characteristics. After assessment, patients were treated with either PCB or SCB based on our center's time-based approach. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imagining was used to assess the pre- and post-procedural minimal stent area (MSA). All the patients were followed up and major adverse cardiovascular events were documented for patients in both the groups.

RESULTS

Of total 85 patients with ISR, 32 underwent treatment with PCB and 53 with SCB. A significant difference was noted in the post procedural MSA in both the groups (p = 0.005) and the values were 7.01 ± 1.11 mm2 and 8.01 ± 1.70 mm2 for PCB and SCB group, respectively. At median follow-up of 3.8 years, no cardiac death was noted in PCB group and one death was reported in SCB group (p = 0.459). In PCB group, target lesion revascularization (TLR) was noted in one (12.5 %) patient, while in SCB group TLR was noted in four (16.5 %) patients (p = 0.920).

CONCLUSION

Both PCB and SCB are found to be effective and safe in treating in patients with drug-eluting stents-ISR. Also, the use of DCB with imaging techniques like IVUS enhances treatment outcomes and optimizes patient care in ISR treatment.

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon for the Management of In-Stent Coronary Restenosis: An Updated Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloons present a potentially advantageous therapeutic approach for managing coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the comparative benefits of paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) over uncoated balloons (UCBs) remain unclear.

AIMS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with PCBs and UCBs.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies comparing PCBs and UCBs in managing coronary ISR. We used a random-effects model to pool risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Quality and risk of bias were evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool.

RESULTS

We included seven randomized controlled trials with 1349 patients, of whom 840 underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with PCB. In our pooled analysis, patients treated with PCB had lower risks of target lesion revascularization (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.18-0.52; p < 0.01), target vessel revascularization (0.53, 0.42-0.67; p < 0.01), major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (0.25, 0.16-0.38; p < 0.01), and myocardial infarction (MI) (0.59, 0.37-0.95; p = 0.03). However, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (0.79, 0.37-1.70; p = 0.54), cardiac death (0.46, 0.03-8.12; p = 0.60), while tendencies for a significant difference were found for target lesion failure (0.39, 0.13-1.11; p = 0.08), or stent thrombosis (0.21, 0.03-1.35 p = 0.10).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that PCBs are superior to UCBs regarding the occurrence of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, MACEs, and MI, but they do not differ in all-cause mortality, and cardiac death, while trends to significant differences favoring PCB were found to stent thrombosis and target lesion failure.

From Mechanisms to Management: Tackling In-Stent Restenosis in the Drug-Eluting Stent Era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Drug-eluting stent (DES) technology has greatly enhanced the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). The aim of the present paper is to provide a comprehensive review of in-stent restenosis (ISR), focusing on the contemporary DES era, including its incidence, mechanisms, and imaging characterization.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the widespread use of DES and numerous improvements, recent clinical data indicate that ISR still occurs in 5-10% of PCI procedures, posing a considerable public health issue. The incidence, morphology, and clinical implications of ISR are determined by a complex interplay of several factors: the patient, stent, procedure, and vessel and lesion-related factors. Advancements in intracoronary imaging have provided greater insight into its patterns and underlying causes. Over time, treatment strategies have evolved, and current guidelines recommend an individualized approach using intracoronary imaging to characterize ISR's underlying substrate.

The Design and Feasibility of Optimal Treatment for Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis (OPEN-ISR)-A Prospective, Randomised, Multicentre Clinical Trial

Introduction: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) is a cornerstone of the management of ischemic heart disease. However, in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a significant clinical challenge, occurring in approximately 5-10% of patients undergoing PCI. This study is designed to compare the efficacy and safety of the primary therapeutic approaches for DES-ISR, specifically drug-coated balloons (DCBs)-paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) and sirolimus-coated balloons (SCBs)-with a new-generation everolimus-eluting stent (EES), contributing to the evolving field of personalized medicine. Methods and Analysis: This prospective, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial aims to enroll 150 patients with DES-ISR, who will be randomised into one of the following: SCB, PCB, or EES. The primary endpoint comparing DCB and EES is late lumen loss (LLL) at 6 months, as measured by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Secondary endpoints comparing the three arms include a device-oriented composite endpoint, intraluminal gain, optical coherence tomography (OCT) measured LLL, and correlations between LLL and quantitative flow ratio (QFR). The primary endpoint will be analysed using a non-inferiority design, with a margin set at 0.25 mm, for which the sample size was calculated. Statistical analysis of the primary endpoint will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis with a one-tailed Mann-Whitney U test with a significance level of 95. Secondary endpoints will be analysed via superiority testing using ANOVA, the Kruskal-Wallis test, logistic regression, or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate. Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol has been approved by the Medical Devices Department of the Hungarian National Institute of Pharmacy and Nutrition, ensuring compliance with ethical standards as outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. All investigators declare no conflicts of interest related to this study. The trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under the ID: NCT04862052.

Drug-Coated Balloons for the Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease: A Review

Importance

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has emerged as an alternative to drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) as well as de novo coronary artery disease.

Observations

DCBs are balloons coated with antiproliferative agents and excipients, whose aim is to foster favorable vessel healing after appropriate lesion preparation. By providing homogeneous antiproliferative drug delivery in the absence of permanent foreign body implantation, DCBs offer multiple advantages over DES, including preservation of vessel anatomy and function and positive vessel remodeling. As such, DCBs have become appealing for treatment of ISR, small-vessel disease, long lesions, simplification of bifurcation procedures, and treatment of diffuse distal disease after recanalization of chronic total occlusions. In addition, patients with high bleeding risk, diabetes, and acute coronary syndrome might also stand to benefit from DCB angioplasty.

Conclusions and Relevance

Although commercially available in numerous countries now for more than a decade, DCB only recently obtained US Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of coronary ISR. Moreover, preliminary results from newer generation devices tested in different clinical scenarios have raised the interest of the international community. Accordingly, an up-to-date review is timely particularly with the anticipated wave of research on the matter. Herein, this review encompasses DCB technologies, their worldwide usage, details on relevant indications, and key procedural aspects of DCB angioplasty.

Application of Drug-Coated Balloons in Complex High Risk and Indicated Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

There is a growing trend of patients with significant comorbidities among those referred for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Consequently, the number of patients undergoing complex high risk indicated PCI (CHIP) is rising. CHIP patients frequently present with factors predisposing to extensive drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, such as bifurcation and/or heavily calcified coronary lesions, which exposes them to the risks associated with an increased stent burden. The drug-coated balloon (DCB) may overcome some of the limitations of DES, either through a hybrid strategy (DCB and DES combined) or as a leave-nothing-behind strategy (DCB-only). As such, there is a growing interest in extending the application of DCB to the CHIP population. The present review provides an outline of the available evidence on DCB use in CHIP patients, which comprise the elderly, comorbid, and patients with complex coronary anatomy. Although the majority of available data are observational, most studies support a lower threshold for the use of DCBs, particularly when multiple CHIP factors coexist within a single patient. In patients with comorbidities which predispose to bleeding events (such as increasing age, diabetes mellitus, and hemodialysis) DCBs may encourage shorter dual antiplatelet therapy duration-although randomized trials are currently lacking. Further, DCBs may simplify PCI in bifurcation lesions and chronic total coronary occlusions by reducing total stent length, and allow for late lumen enlargement when used in a hybrid fashion. In conclusion, DCBs pose a viable therapeutic option in CHIP patients, either as a complement to DES or as stand-alone therapy in selected cases.

Rationale and design of the prevail global trial program evaluating the prevail drug-coated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis and de novo small vessel disease

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the leading cause of treatment failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Especially in small caliber coronary arteries, restenosis is common following PCI and represents a treatment challenge. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) are an attractive alternative to stents for treatment of both ISR and small vessel disease. The safety and efficacy of the Prevail DCB will be assessed for (1) the treatment of ISR and (2) de novo lesions in small vessels.

TRIAL DESIGN

Prevail Global is a prospective, international, dual cohort clinical study enrolling (1) patients undergoing PCI for ISR in a randomized controlled trial (1:1) design comparing the Prevail DCB versus an FDA-approved DCB (AgentTM, Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick MA), and (2) patients with de novo small vessel disease undergoing PCI with the Prevail DCB as part of a single-arm study compared with a historical control. The primary endpoint is target lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months post procedure. Patient follow-up is planned for 1 month, 6 months, and yearly through 5 years. Enrollment is expected to start in early 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prevail Global study will directly assess the safety and efficacy of the Prevail DCB for the treatment of ISR and de novo small vessel lesions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prevail Global, NCT06535854, is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06535854.

A randomized embedded multifactorial adaptive platform for extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (REMAP ECMO) - design and rationale of the left ventricular unloading trial domain

BACKGROUND

The use of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) remains associated with high rates of complications, weaning failure and mortality which can be partly explained by a knowledge gap on how to properly manage patients on ECMO support. To address relevant patient management issues, we designed a "Randomized Embedded Multifactorial Adaptive Platform (REMAP)" in the setting of ECMO (REMAP ECMO) and a first embedded randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effects of routine early left ventricular (LV) unloading through intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP).

METHODS

REMAP ECMO describes a registry-based platform allowing for the embedding of multiple response adaptive RCTs (trial domains) which can perpetually address the effect of relevant patient management issues on ECMO weaning success. A first trial domain studies the effects of LV unloading by means of an IABP as an adjunct to veno-arterial (V-A) ECMO versus V-A ECMO alone on ECMO weaning success at 30 days in adult cardiogenic shock patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The primary outcome of this trial is "successful weaning from ECMO" being defined as a composite of survival without the need for mechanical circulatory support, heart transplantation, or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) at 30 days after initiation of ECMO. Secondary outcomes include the need for interventional escalation of LV unloading strategy, mechanistic endpoints, survival characteristics until 1 year after ECMO initiation, and quality of life. Trial data will be analysed using a Bayesian statistical framework. The adaptive design allows for a high degree of flexibility, such as response adaptive randomization and early stopping of the trial for efficacy or futility. The REMAP ECMO LV unloading study is approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Erasmus Medical Center and is publicly registered.

CONCLUSION

This REMAP ECMO trial platform enables the efficient roll-out of multiple RCTs on relevant patient management issues. A first embedded trial domain will compare routine LV unloading by means of an IABP as an adjunct to V-A ECMO versus V-A ECMO alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05913622.

Recent Advances in the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the predominant cause of stent failure and the most common indication for repeat revascularization. Despite technological advances in stent design, ISR continues to pose significant challenges, contributing to increased morbidity and mortality among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. In the last decade, intravascular imaging has emerged as an important method for identifying the mechanisms behind ISR and guiding its treatment. Treatment options for ISR have expanded to include balloon angioplasty, cutting or scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy, atheroablative devices, drug-eluting stents, drug-coated balloons, surgical revascularization, and intravascular brachytherapy. The aim of the current review is to describe the classification and mechanisms of ISR, provide a comprehensive and updated overview of the evidence supporting different treatment strategies, suggest a management algorithm, and present insights into future developments in the field.

Drug-coated balloons for coronary artery disease: An updated review with future perspectives

Since the advent of coronary stents, two of the most common long-term complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are in-stent restenosis (ISR) and stent thrombosis (ST). Although the rates of ST have been nearly abolished and ISR rates have declined with the current gold-standard second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), late ISR of DES remains a valid concern in the field of interventional cardiology. The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a non-stent technology that relies on the concept of targeted homogeneous drug delivery from an inflated balloon to restore luminal vascularity, treat atherosclerosis, and overcome some limitations of PCI, including ISR and prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy to prevent ST by leaving nothing behind. Most clinical evidence on coronary DCBs predominantly comes from small, randomized data and registries using paclitaxel DCBs for ISR and de novo lesions in the coronary space. Since 2014, outside the United States, DCBs have been approved for the treatment of ISR, with a class I recommendation by the European Society of Cardiology. The Food and Drug Administration very recently approved the Agent DCB to treat ISR in patients with coronary artery disease in the US. Additionally, recent randomized clinical data also showed DCB's safety and efficacy for the treatment of de novo small-vessel disease and high-bleeding-risk patients, while their role for other clinical situations including acute coronary syndrome, large-vessel disease, bifurcation lesions, and long-diffuse distal lesions is currently under investigation. Herein, we review the evidence-based role of DCBs in the treatment of coronary lesions and offer future perspectives.

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty versus drug-eluting stent implantation in ACS patients with different angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stents (DES) are two widely used treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR). Focal and non-focal types of ISR affect the clinical outcomes. The present study aims to compare DES reimplantation versus DCB angioplasty in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with focal ISR and non-focal ISR lesions.

METHODS

Patients with ISR lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were retrospectively evaluated and divided into DES group and DCB group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) at 24 months follow up. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance the baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

For focal ISR, TLF was comparable in the DES and DCB groups at 24 months of follow-up (Before PSM, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-1.27; p = 0.244; After PSM, HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.40-1.73; p = 0.625). For non-focal ISR, TLF was significantly decreased in DES compared with DCB group (Before PSM, HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.29-0.63; p < 0.001; After PSM, HR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.19-0.59; p < 0.001), which was mainly attributed to the lower incidence of clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) (Before PSM, HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.26-0.59; p < 0.001; After PSM, HR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.15-0.54; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes for DES and DCB treatment are similar in focal type of ISR lesions. For non-focal ISR, the treatment of DES showed a significant decrease in TLF which was mainly attributed to a lower incidence of CD-TLR.

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Versus Uncoated Balloon Angioplasty for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

In-stent restenosis (ISR) accounts for 10% of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the United States. Paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) have been evaluated as a therapy for coronary ISR in multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from inception to April 1, 2024) for RCTs evaluating PCBs versus uncoated balloon angioplasty (BA) in patients with coronary ISR. The outcomes of interest were target lesion revascularization (TLR), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and stent thrombosis. We pooled the estimates using an inverse variance random-effects model. The effect sizes were reported as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 6 RCTs with 1,343 patients were included. At a follow-up ranging from 6 to 12 months from randomization, the use of PCBs was associated with a statistically significant decrease in TLR (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.68) and MACE (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.64) compared with BA for coronary ISR. However, there was no significant difference in risk between PCBs and BA in terms of all-cause mortality (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.31), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.02 to 16.85), MI (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.31), and stent thrombosis (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.00 to 5.06). In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that PCBs compared with uncoated BA for the treatment of coronary ISR at intermediate-term follow-up of 1 year were associated with a significant decrease in TLR and MACE without any difference in mortality, MI, or stent thrombosis.

Drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in patients with in-stent restenosis: An updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have promising results in the management of in-stent restenosis (ISR), still their role remains a major challenge, and not well established in contemporary clinical practice.

AIMS

To provide a comprehensive appraisal of the efficacy and safety of DCBs in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, web of Science, Ovid, and Cochrane Central from inception until 30 March, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DCB versus DES in ISR patients. Our primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and late lumen loss (LLL). Secondary clinical endpoints were all-cause death, cardiac death, MI, TLR, TVR, and stent thrombosis, and angiographic outcomes were MLD, and in-stent binary restenosis.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs comprising 1977 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of MACE was 15.57% in the DCB group compared to 14.13% in the DES group, with no significant difference in the risk of MACE following DCB (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87 to 1.44). Compared with the DES intervention, the risk of LLL was comparable to the DCB intervention (mean difference [MD] -0.08, 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.02), while the incidence of TLR was increased in the DCB intervention (OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.2 to 1.99).

CONCLUSION

DCB was comparable to DES implantation is ISR patients regarding clinical outcomes, however it showed an increase in TLR events. Moreover, a RCT with large sample size and longer follow-up duration is warrened to validate these results.

Comparative long-term efficacy and safety of two paclitaxel-coated balloons with different coating strategies for the treatment of drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis

BACKGROUND

We previously showed non-inferiority of a low-dose paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) with citrate excipient (Agent PCB) as compared to normal-dose iopromide excipient (SeQuent Please PCB) in terms of angiographic and clinical endpoints at 12 months. The long-term clinical efficacy and safety of Agent PCB is not defined.

METHODS

262 patients (323 DES-ISR lesions) were enrolled in this study and treated with either Agent PCB (125 patients, 151 lesions) in the ISAR-DESIRE 3a trial or with SeQuent Please PCB (137 patients, 172 lesions) in the setting of the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 trial with similar in- and exclusion criteria serving as historical control arm. The follow-up period was extended to 7 years. The efficacy and safety endpoints of this analysis were target-lesion revascularization (TLR), death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion thrombosis (TLT) at 7 years.

RESULTS

At 7 years, 206 patients (78.6%) were alive. The risks of TLR (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-1.90; p = 0.205), death (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 0.82-2.35; p = 0.227), MI (HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.39-3.15; p = 0.852) and TLT (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 0.20-24.10; p = 0.523) were comparable between Agent PCB and SeQuent PCB. Multivariate analysis showed comparable risks of TLR, death and MI between both PCB devices.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated for DES-ISR by angioplasty with Agent PCB and SeQuent Please PCB, there was no statistically significant difference in TLR at 7 years. Randomized trials with standardized lesion preparation and long-term follow-up are warranted to further evaluate comparative efficacy of both devices. (ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT02367495).

Targeted NAD+ repletion via biomimetic nanoparticle enables simultaneous management of intimal hyperplasia and accelerated re-endothelialization: A proof-of-concept study toward next-generation of endothelium-protective, anti-restenotic therapy

Endovascular interventions often fail due to restenosis, primarily caused by smooth muscle cell (SMC) proliferation, leading to intimal hyperplasia (IH). Current strategies to prevent restenosis are far from perfect and impose significant collateral damage on the fragile endothelial cell (EC), causing profound thrombotic risks. Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) is a co-enzyme and signaling substrate implicated in redox and metabolic homeostasis, with a pleiotropic role in protecting against cardiovascular diseases. However, a functional link between NAD+ repletion and the delicate duo of IH and EC regeneration has yet to be established. NAD+ repletion has been historically challenging due to its poor cellular uptake and low bioavailability. We have recently invented the first nanocarrier that enables direct intracellular delivery of NAD+ in vivo. Combining the merits of this prototypic NAD+-loaded calcium phosphate (CaP) nanoparticle (NP) and biomimetic surface functionalization, we created a biomimetic P-NAD+-NP with platelet membrane coating, which enabled an injectable modality that targets IH with excellent biocompatibility. Using human cell primary culture, we demonstrated the benefits of NP-assisted NAD+ repletion in selectively inhibiting the excessive proliferation of aortic SMC, while differentially protecting aortic EC from apoptosis. Moreover, in a rat balloon angioplasty model, a single-dose treatment with intravenously injected P-NAD+-NP immediately post angioplasty not only mitigated IH, but also accelerated the regeneration of EC (re-endothelialization) in vivo in comparison to control groups (i.e., saline, free NAD+ solution, empty CaP-NP). Collectively, our current study provides proof-of-concept evidence supporting the role of targeted NAD+ repletion nanotherapy in managing restenosis and improving reendothelialization.

Long-term outcomes of DCB and DES for the treatment of in-stent restenosis in relation to the vessel size

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloons (DCB) or drug-eluting stents (DES) are well-established treatments for in-stent restenosis, however little is known about the impact of vessel size on the outcomes. The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of DCB versus DES in DES in-stent restenosis depending on the vessel size.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with DES in-stent restenosis who underwent PCI between January 2010 and February 2018 entered the registry with a long-term follow-up. Patients who received DCB at the index procedure were compared with those who received DES in three subgroups depending on the vessel size (≤2.5 mm; 2.5-3.5 mm; >3.5 mm). Data were analyzed using propensity score matching and Kaplan-Meier estimator plots.

RESULTS

Among 1,374 patients with DES in-stent restenosis, 615 were treated with DES and 759 with DCB. After propensity score matching, we analyzed 752 patients in the DES and DCB groups at a long-term follow-up. The risk of DOCE did not differ significantly between the DES and DCB groups, both in the overall population (HR 0.85; 95%CI [0.58; 1.26], log-rank p = 0.41) and when divided into small (HR 0.84; 95%CI [0.36; 1.95], log-rank p = 0.70), medium-sized (HR 0.90; 95%CI [0.49; 1.65], log-rank p = 0.73), and large-sized (HR 0.81; 95%CI [0.42; 1.53], log-rank p = 0.50) coronary arteries. The incidence of all-cause death was significantly higher in the overall DES population (HR 4.03; 95%CI [2.40; 6.79], log-rank p < 0.001) and subgroup of small (HR 5.54; 95%CI [1.80; 17.02], log-rank p = 0.003), medium-sized (HR 4.37; 95%CI [1.92; 9.94], log-rank p = 0.009) and large-sized coronary arteries (HR 3.26; 95%CI [1.35; 7.86], log-rank p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

DES and DCB strategies are comparable methods of treating ISR regardless of the diameter of the treated vessel in a long-term follow-up.

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 stent vs. Balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

In-stent restenosis (ISR) is seen in up to 20% of cases and is the primary cause of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) failure. With the use of re-stenting with a drug-eluting stent (DES), plain old balloon angioplasty (BA) use is decreasing. We aim to compare the efficacy and safety profile of DES over BA in the management of ISR.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DES to BA for coronary ISR. The mantel-Haenszel method with a random effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Four trials comprising 912 patients (543 in DES and 369 in the BA group) were included in the final study. The mean follow-up was 45 months. DES was found to be superior with a lower requirement of target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31-0.64, p-value <0.0001), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR: 0.59, 95%CI: 0.44-0.78, p-value 0.0002) compared to BA. However, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion thrombosis were not different between the two intervention arms.

CONCLUSION

DES was found to be superior to BA for the management of coronary ISR with a reduction in the risk of TLR and TVR. No difference in mortality, risk of MI, or target lesion thrombosis was observed between the two interventions.

Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty vs Plain Balloon Angioplasty in patients with coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a significant challenge in interventional cardiology despite advancements in stent technology. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs), which deliver antiproliferative agents directly to the vessel wall, have emerged as a promising alternative to plain balloon angioplasty for ISR treatment. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of DCBs compared to plain balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary ISR.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase was conducted on June 27, 2024. The search identified randomized controlled trials comparing DCBs and plain balloon angioplasty for ISR treatment. Six trials involving 1,322 patients met the inclusion criteria. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Data extraction and statistical analysis were performed using RevMan software, assessing heterogeneity with the I2 statistic and publication bias using funnel plots.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that DCBs significantly reduced late in-stent and in-segment luminal loss (P < 0.001) and target lesion revascularization (P = 0.02) compared to plain balloon angioplasty. Major adverse cardiovascular events and the combined endpoint of target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, and death also showed highly significant improvements with DCB treatment (P < 0.00001 and P = 0.0002, respectively). However, no significant effect was observed on myocardial infarction and mortality rates.

CONCLUSION

DCBs significantly reduce in-stent late luminal loss, target lesion revascularization, and major adverse cardiovascular events compared to plain balloon angioplasty.

Paclitaxel-coated versus sirolimus-coated balloon angioplasty for coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although use of sirolimus-based analogs has shown superiority over paclitaxel in drug-eluting stents, the relative efficacy of these two agents released from drug-coated balloons (DCB) is unclear. The present meta-analysis is aimed to compare outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) versus sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) for either in-stent restenosis or native de novo lesions.

METHODS

The study outcomes were 1) target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization, and 2) follow-up angiographic parameters including late lumen loss (LLL), diameter stenosis, and minimal lumen diameter (MLD). Pooled odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by using random-effects models.

RESULTS

A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from their inception to January 2024 identified five randomized clinical trials and three observational studies with a total of 1861 patients (889 in PCB and 972 in SCB groups). During 9-12 months of follow-up, there was no significant difference in TLF (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.75-1.35) between the two groups. On follow-up angiography at 6-9 months, MLD (WMD 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.17) was larger in PCB but there was no statistically significant difference in LLL (WMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.23-0.02) and diameter stenosis (WMD -3.33, 95% CI -8.11-1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing DCB-only PCI, the risk of TLF was similar during 9-12 months of follow-up after PCB and SCB treatment. However, the MLD was larger favoring PCB over SCB on follow-up angiography.

Long-Term Outcomes Following Sirolimus-Coated Balloon or Drug-Eluting Stents for Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that drug-coated balloons may benefit in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment. However, the efficacy of new-generation sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) compared with the latest generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) has not been studied in this setting.

METHODS

All patients in the EASTBORNE (The All-Comers Sirolimus-Coated Balloon European Registry) and DEB-DRAGON (DEB vs Thin-DES in DES-ISR: Long Term Outcomes) registries undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for DES-ISR were included in the study. The primary study end point was target lesion revascularization at 24 months. Secondary end points were major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 24 months. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCB versus thin-struts DES in ISR at long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 1545 patients with 1679 ISR lesions were included in the pooled analysis, of whom 621 (40.2%) patients with 621 lesions were treated with thin-strut DES and 924 (59.8%) patients with 1045 lesions were treated with SCB. The unmatched cohort showed no differences in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (10.8% versus 11.8%; P=0.568); however, there was a trend toward lower rates of myocardial infarction (7.4% versus 5.0%; P=0.062) and major adverse cardiovascular events (20.8% versus 17.1%; P=0.072) in the SCB group. After propensity score matching (n=335 patients per group), there were no significant differences in the rates of target lesion revascularization (11.6% versus 11.8%; P=0.329), target vessel revascularization (14.0% versus 13.1%; P=0.822), myocardial infarction (7.2% versus 4.5%; P=0.186), all-cause death (5.7% versus 4.2%; P=0.476), and major adverse cardiovascular event (21.5% versus 17.6%; P=0.242) between DES and SCB treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ISR, angioplasty with SCB compared with thin-struts DES is associated with comparable rates of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, all-cause death, and major adverse cardiovascular events at 2 years.

Magic Touch sirolimus-coated balloon: animal and clinical evidence of a coronary sirolimus drug-coated balloon

The Magic Touch sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) was recently introduced in Europe and features robust clinical technology different from other devices on the market. This device is able to deliver a sufficient sirolimus dose to the target segment to reduce neointimal proliferation with very little exposure downstream and no apparent adverse effects at sustained high drug concentrations. The SCB represents a promising novelty within the drug-coated balloon arena due to its mid-term efficacy and safety in the treatment of coronary artery disease, especially in de novo and small-vessel coronary lesions. The purpose of this article is to provide an up-to-date overview of the currently available animal and clinical trial results, as well as to highlight ongoing trials on the Magic Touch SCB.

Sex-specific inequalities in the use of drug-coated balloons for small coronary artery disease: a report from the BASKET-SMALL 2 trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Recent data have established non-inferiority of drug-coated balloons (DCB) compared to drug-eluting stents (DES) for treatment of small-vessel coronary artery disease. Since coronary vessels in women might have anatomical and pathophysiological particularities, the safety of the DCB strategy among women compared to men needs to be assessed in more detail.

METHODS

In BASKET-SMALL 2, patients with de novo lesions in coronary vessels < 3 mm and an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly allocated (1:1) to DCB vs. DES after successful lesion preparation. The primary objective of the randomized trial was to establish non-inferiority of DCB vs. DES regarding major adverse cardiac events (MACE; i.e., cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) after 12 months. The aim of the current sub-analysis is to evaluate whether the DCB strategy is equally safe among women and men after 12 and 36 months.

RESULTS

Among 758 randomized patients, 382 were assigned to DCB (23% women) and 376 to DES (30% women). In general, women were older, had more often diabetes mellitus and renal insufficiency, and presented more often with an acute coronary syndrome, whereas men were more often smokers, had multivessel disease and a previous history of acute myocardial infarction, and received a treatment with a statin. After 3 years, the primary clinical end point was not significantly different between groups (13% women vs. 16% men, HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.52-1.30; p = 0.40). There was no interaction between sex and coronary intervention strategy regarding MACE at 36 months (10% women vs. 16% men in DCB, 16% women vs. 15% men in DES; pinteraction = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

In small native coronary artery disease, there was no statistically significant effect of sex on the difference between DCB and DES regarding MACE up to 36 months.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov . Unique identifier: NCT01574534.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual Paclitaxel and Sirolimus Nanoparticle-Coated Balloon

We evaluated a novel dual active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) drug-coated balloon (DCB), which consists of a coating of nanoparticles encapsulating low-dose paclitaxel (PTX) in combination with sirolimus in a synergistic ratio. Compared to the PTX DCB, the dual API DCB demonstrated similar inhibition of cell proliferation in vitro but at a significantly lower total drug dose (over 13 times lower than sirolimus nanoparticles). Animal experiments demonstrated that the dual API DCB is more effective in inhibiting intimal cell proliferation with insignificant downstream embolic effects and myocardial damage compared to the PTX DCB. These findings indicate that dual API DCBs have a high potential to demonstrate improved clinical outcomes and a greater safety profile than the PTX DCBs.

Performance of drug-coated balloons in coronary and below-the-knee arteries: Anatomical, physiological and pathological considerations

Below-the-knee (infrapopliteal) atherosclerotic disease, which presents as chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) in nearly 50% of patients, represents a treatment challenge when it comes to the endovascular intervention arm of management. Due to reduced tissue perfusion, patients usually experience pain at rest and atrophic changes correlated to the extent of the compromised perfusion. Unfortunately, the prognosis remains unsatisfactory with 30% of patients requiring major amputation and a mortality rate of 25% within 1 year. To date, randomized multicentre trials of endovascular intervention have shown that drug-eluting stents (DES) increase patency rate and lower target lesion revascularization rate compared to plain balloon angioplasty and bare-metal stents. The majority of these trials recruited patients with focal infrapopliteal lesions, while most patients requiring endovascular intervention have complex and diffuse atherosclerotic disease. Moreover, due to the nature of the infrapopliteal arteries, the use of long DES is limited. Following recent results of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in the treatment of femoropopliteal and coronary arteries, it was hoped that similar effective results would be achieved in the infrapopliteal arteries. In reality, multicentre trials have failed to support the proposed hypothesis and no advantage was found in using DCBs in comparison to plain balloon angioplasty. This review aims to explore anatomical, physiological and pathological differences between lesions of the infrapopliteal and coronary arteries to explain the differences in outcome when using DCBs.

Angiography-based Fractional Flow Reserve for the Prediction of Clinical Outcomes After Drug-coated Balloon or Plain Old Balloon Angioplasty

BACKGROUND

AccuFFRangio is a novel method for fast computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on coronary angiography and computational fluid dynamics. The association between the AccuFFRangio and clinical outcomes after drug-coated balloon (DCB) or plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) remains to be investigated.

METHODS

This study included consecutive patients who underwent balloon angioplasty from December 2016 to October 2020. AccuFFRangio was calculated retrospectively based on the post-procedural angiography obtained immediately after angioplasty. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, vessel-related myocardial infarction, and repeat target vessel revascularization.

RESULTS

A total of 169 patients were retrospectively analyzed in this study. Post-procedural AccuFFRangio (hazard ratio [HR] per 0.1 increase 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-0.48, p < 0.001) was an independent predictor for MACE at 2-year follow-up. Post-procedural AccuFFRangio ≤ 0.87 was determined as the optimal cutoff value to predict MACE with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.872 (95% CI 0.813-0.919, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

AccuFFRangio measured immediately after balloon angioplasty is a promising predictor of unfavorable clinical outcomes.

Drug-Coated Balloons in the Management of Coronary Artery Disease

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are specialized coronary devices comprised of a semicompliant balloon catheter with an engineered coating that allows the delivery of antiproliferative agents locally to the vessel wall during percutaneous coronary intervention. Although DCBs were initially developed more than a decade ago, their potential in coronary interventions has recently sparked renewed interest, especially in the United States. Originally designed to overcome the limitations of conventional balloon angioplasty and stenting, they aim to match or even improve upon the outcomes of drug-eluting stents without leaving a permanent implant. Presently, in-stent restenosis is the condition with the most robust evidence supporting the use of DCBs. DCBs provide improved long-term vessel patency compared with conventional balloon angioplasty and may be comparable to drug-eluting stents without the need for an additional stent layer, supporting their use as a first-line therapy for in-stent restenosis. Beyond the treatment of in-stent restenosis, DCBs provide an additional tool for de novo lesions for a strategy that avoids a permanent metal scaffold, which may be especially useful for the management of technically challenging anatomies such as small vessels and bifurcations. DCBs might also be advantageous for patients with high bleeding risk due to the decreased necessity for extended antiplatelet therapy, and in patients with diabetes and patients with diffuse disease to minimize long-stented segments. Further studies are crucial to confirm these broader applications for DCBs and to further validate safety and efficacy.

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.

Comparative efficacy of interventional therapies and devices for coronary in-stent restenosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

In-stent restenosis (ISR) has become a significant obstacle to interventional therapy for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for patients with coronary ISR remains controversial. This network meta-analysis (NMA) was aimed to compare and estimate the effectiveness of different PCI strategies and commercial devices for the treatment of patients with coronary ISR.

Methods

In present study, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from database inception to October 20, 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials. We included studies comparing various PCI strategies for the treatment of any type of coronary ISR. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42022364308.

Results

We included 44 eligible trials including 8479 patients, 39 trials comparing the treatment effects of 10 PCIs, and 5 trials comparing the efficacy between different types of drug-eluting stent (DES) or drug-coated balloon (DCB) devices. Among the PCIs, everolimus-eluting stent was the optimal strategy considering target lesion revascularization (TLR), percent diameter stenosis (%DS), and binary restenosis (BR), and sirolimus-coated balloon was the optimal strategy considering late lumen loss (LLL). In the comparison of commercial devices, the combination strategy excimer laser coronary angioplasty plus SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon showed promising therapeutic prospects.

Conclusions

DCB and DES remain the preferred treatment strategies for coronary ISR, considering both the primary clinical outcome (TLR) and the angiographic outcomes (LLL, BR, %DS). Personalized combination interventions including DCB or DES hold promise as a novel potential treatment pattern for coronary ISR.

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The AGENT IDE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States.

Objective

To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Design, Setting, and Participants

AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023.

Interventions

Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure-defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death-was tested for superiority.

Results

Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253.

Off-Label Use of Peripheral Paclitaxel Drug-Coated Balloons in Management of Recurrent Coronary In-Stent Restenosis

Background

While not available for clinical use in the United States, dedicated drug-coated balloons (DCB) are currently under investigation for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). Peripheral drug-coated balloons (P-DCB) have been used off-label for coronary ISR. Further data regarding this practice are needed. We aimed to describe outcomes in patients who underwent off-label P-DCB angioplasty for coronary ISR.

Methods

We analyzed data on P-DCB angioplasty for coronary ISR at a single high-volume center between April 1, 2015, and December 30, 2017. Demographic and procedural details were collected, with systematic follow-up as clinically indicated.

Results

Data from 31 patients treated with P-DCB angioplasty (mean age 68.0 ± 10.7 years) with coronary ISR (17 recurrent and 14 first time) were analyzed. Most patients presented with high-grade angina (81%) or myocardial infarction (13%). Treated ISR lesions were in native coronary arteries (68%), saphenous vein grafts (SVG, 23%), and the left internal mammary artery (10%). Diffuse intrastent ISR was common (69%) with a mean lesion length of 21.7 ± 12.4 mm. No postprocedural myocardial infarction occurred and 1 nonprocedural mortality occurred during index admission. At follow-up (median: 283, interquartile range [IQR]: 354 days), repeat angiography was performed in 19 patients (median: 212, IQR: 188 days), and 11 patients had target lesion recurrent ISR (Kaplan-Meier event-free survival estimate: 44.7%, 95% CI, 26.1%-76.5%).

Conclusions

In the absence of availability of dedicated coronary DCB, treatment of coronary ISR using P-DCB angioplasty was feasible, although follow-up demonstrated continued risk for recurrent ISR in this high-risk population.

Chinese expert consensus on the clinical application of drug-coated balloon (2nd Edition)

Percutaneous coronary interventions have progressed through the era of plain balloon dilation, bare-metal stent insertion to drug-eluting stent treatment, which has significantly reduced the acute occlusion and restenosis rates of target vessels and improved patient prognosis, making drug-eluting stents the mainstream interventional treatment for coronary artery disease. In recent years, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have become a new treatment strategy for coronary artery disease, and the drugs used in the coating and the coating technology have progressed in the past years. Without permanent implant, a DCB delivers antiproliferative drugs rapidly and uniformly into the vessel wall via the excipient during a single balloon dilation. Many evidence suggests that DCB angioplasty is an effective measure for dealing with in-stent restenosis and de novo lesions in small coronary vessels. As more clinical studies are published, new evidence is emerging for the use of DCB angioplasty in a wide range of coronary diseases, and the indications are expanding internationally. Based on the latest research from China and elsewhere, the Expert Writing Committee of the Chinese Expert Consensus on Clinical Applications of Drug-Coated Balloon has updated the previous DCB consensus after evidence-based discussions and meetings in terms of adequate preparation of in-stent restenosis lesions, expansion of the indications for coronary de novo lesions, and precise guidance of DCB treatment by intravascular imaging and functional evaluation.

A New Frontier for Drug-Coated Balloons: Treatment of "De Novo" Stenosis in Large Vessel Coronary Artery Disease

Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) are a well-established option for treating in-stent restenosis endorsed by European Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. However, in recent years, a strategy of "leaving nothing behind" with DCB in de novo coronary stenosis has emerged as an appealing approach. Methods: We performed a systematic review to evaluate the current literature on the use of drug-coated balloons in the treatment of de novo stenosis in large vessel disease. Results: Observational studies, as well as randomized studies, demonstrated the safety of DCB percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in large vessel disease. The rate of major adverse cardiac events is even lower compared to drug-eluting stents in stable coronary artery disease. Conclusions: DCB PCI is feasible in large vessel disease, and future large, randomized studies are ongoing to confirm these results.

Treatment of coronary lesions with a novel crystalline sirolimus-coated balloon

Background

There is mounting data supporting the use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) not only for treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR), but also in native coronary artery disease. So far, paclitaxel-coated balloons represented the mainstay DCBs. The SeQuent® crystalline sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) (B.Braun Medical Inc, Germany) represents a novel DCB, which allows a sustained release of the limus-drug. We evaluated its performance in an all-comer cohort, including complex coronary lesions.

Methods

Consecutive patients treated with the SeQuent® SCB were analyzed from the prospective SIROOP registry (NCT04988685). We assessed clinical outcomes, including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and cardiovascular death. Angiograms and outcomes were independently adjudicated.

Results

From March 2021 to March 2023, we enrolled 126 patients and lesions, of which 100 (79%) treated using a "DCB-only" strategy and 26 (21%) with a hybrid approach (DES + DCB). The mean age was 68 ± 10 years, 48 (38%) patients had an acute coronary syndrome. Regarding lesion characteristics, ISR was treated in 27 (21%), 11 (9%) underwent CTO-PCI and 59 (47%) of the vessels were moderate to severe calcified. Procedural success rate was 100%. At a median follow-up time of 12.7 (IQR 12; 14.2) months, MACE occurred in 5 patients (4.3%). No acute vessel closure was observed.

Conclusions

Our data indicates promising outcomes following treatment with this novel crystalline SCB in an all-comer cohort with complex coronary lesions. These results require further investigation with randomized trials.

Sirolimus-coated balloon in all-comer population of coronary artery disease patients: the EASTBOURNE DIABETES prospective registry

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients are still suboptimal, and it is unclear if diabetic patients might derive a benefit from the use of drug-coated balloons.

AIMS

To evaluate the impact of diabetes mellitus on the outcomes of patients undergoing PCI with sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) MagicTouch (Concept Medical, India).

METHODS

We conducted a subgroup analysis of the prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated EASTBOURNE registry, evaluating the performance of MagicTouch SCB in patients with and without diabetes. The study primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12-month follow-up. Secondary clinical endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACE), death, myocardial infarction (MI), and BARC 2-5 bleedings.

RESULTS

Among 2,083 enrolled patients, a total of 864 suffered from diabetes (41.5%). Patients with diabetes had a numerically higher occurrence of TLR (6.5% vs. 4.7% HR 1.38, 95%CI 0.91-2.08), all-cause death (3.8% vs. 2.6%, HR 1.81, 95%CI 0.95-3.46), and MACE (12.2% vs. 8.9%; HR 1.26 95%CI 0.92-1.74). The incidence of spontaneous MI was significantly higher among diabetic patients (3.4% vs. 1.5%, HR 2.15 95%CI 1.09-4.25); bleeding events did not significantly differ. The overall incidence of TLR was higher among in-stent restenosis (ISR) as compared to de-novo coronary lesions, irrespectively from diabetes status.

CONCLUSIONS

In the EASTBOURNE DIABETES registry, diabetic patients treated with the MagicTouch SCB did not have a significant increase in TLR when compared to non-diabetic patients; moreover, diabetic status did not affect the study device performance in terms of TLR, in both de-novo lesions and ISR.

Recurrent Revascularization at 10 Years After Percutaneous Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with recurrence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains particularly challenging, with data and guideline recommendations for repeat percutaneous coronary intervention being scant.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term incidence of recurrent revascularization events after percutaneous treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, 402 patients (500 lesions) assigned to plain balloon (PB), drug-coated balloon (DCB), or DES treatment in the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 (Efficacy Study of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon, -Stent vs. Plain Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis) trial were followed up over a median of 10.3 years. The primary endpoint was total repeat target lesion revascularization (R-TLR) including all, first and recurrent, events.

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, first R-TLR was required in 204 lesions, 82 in the PB group, 70 in the DCB group, and 52 in the DES group. The total number of R-TLRs was 373: 162 in the PB group, 124 in the DCB group, and 87 in the DES group. During the first year of follow-up, the risk for total R-TLR was reduced by DCB (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.24-0.54) and DES (HR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14-0.38) treatment compared with PB treatment. After 1 year, the risk for total R-TLR was nonsignificantly reduced by DCB treatment (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.16) and significantly reduced by DES treatment (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.95) compared with PB treatment. Risk in the DCB and DES groups was similar during (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.89-2.69) and after (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.82-1.92) 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

The total number of R-TLRs over 10 years after treatment of patients with DES ISR was high. DCBs and particularly DES were able to reduce the need for both first and recurrent revascularization compared with PB treatment.

The evolution and revolution of drug coated balloons in coronary angioplasty: An up-to-date review of literature data

European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines gave class I A indication for use of DCB in in-stent restenosis. However, no indication exists for the usage of DCB in de novo lesions. Although the current generation DES offer excellent results, as we embark more complex lesions such as calcified lesion and chronic total occlusion, restenosis and stent thrombosis are higher and tend to increase within the years. There is increasing desire to leave nothing behind to abolish the risk of restenosis and stent thrombosis and hence the absorbable scaffolds were introduced, but with disappointing results. In addition, they take several years to be absorbed. Drug coated balloons offer an alternative to stents with no permanent implant of metal or polymer. They are already in use in in Europe and Asia and they have been approved for the first time in the United States for clinical trials specifically for restenotic lesions. There is emerging data in de novo lesions which have shown that DCB are noninferior and in some studies maybe even superior to current generation DES especially in small vessels. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on this expanding technology focussing on the evidence in both re-stenotic and de novo lesions.

Design and rationale of a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial to determine the safety and efficacy of the Biolimus A9™ drug coated balloon for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: First-in-man trial (REFORM)

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty with paclitaxel-eluting devices is an established treatment for coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). Biolimus A9™ (BA9), a sirolimus analogue with enhanced lipophilicity, may facilitate enhanced local drug delivery into vascular tissue. A novel DCB coated with Biolimus A9™ represents an alternative to traditional paclitaxel- and sirolimus-coated devices. Hence, we sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of this novel DCB in the treatment of coronary ISR.

METHODS AND DESIGN

REFORM (NCT04079192) is a prospective, multicenter, single blind, randomized controlled trial comparing the BA9-DCB (Biosensors Europe SA, Morges, Switzerland) to the paclitaxel-coated SeQuent® Please DCB (Braun Melsungen AG, Germany) in the treatment of coronary ISR. A total of 201 patients with coronary artery disease and an indication for interventional treatment of ISR in a bare-metal stent (BMS) or drug-eluting stent (DES) have been randomized 2:1 to receive treatment with the BA9- or the paclitaxel-DCB comparator. Patients were enrolled across 24 investigational centers in Europe and Asia. The primary endpoint is percent diameter stenosis (%DS) of the target segment as assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at 6 months. Key secondary endpoints are in-stent late lumen loss, binary restenosis, target lesion failure, target vessel failure, myocardial infarction and death at 6 months. Subjects will be followed for 24 months from enrolment.

IMPLICATIONS

The REFORM trial will seek to prove that the BA9-DCB is non-inferior to the standard paclitaxel-DCB comparator in the treatment of coronary ISR with respect to %DS at 6 months and has similar safety characteristics.

Drug-Coated Balloons for De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Through meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCB), compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) or uncoated devices, in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Only randomized controlled trials were included. The primary outcomes were late lumen loss (LLL), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on clinical indications, whether DCBs were used with a systematic or bailout stent, and types of DESs.

RESULTS

The present meta-analysis demonstrated that DCBs elicit significantly lower incidences of TLR, MACE, and LLL, compared with uncoated devices, and similar incidences, compared with DESs, in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions. Subgroup analysis indicated that DCBs used with a bailout stent achieved lower incidences of binary restenosis and myocardial infarction, compared with uncoated devices, and provided less LLL than DESs. DCBs showed similar rates of TLR and MACE, with significantly less LLL, than DESs in treating de novo small-vessel diseases. The clinical efficacy of DCBs was similar to that of second-generation DES.

CONCLUSION

Overall, DCB is favored over bare metal stent alone in treating de novo coronary lesions. DCBs appear to be a promising alternative to DESs in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions.

Paclitexel versus sirolimus-coated balloon in the treatment of coronary instent restenosis

BACKGROUND

Few studies compared paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) versus sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) in the treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) instent restenosis (ISR).

METHODS

Between November 5, 2009, and October 14, 2020, in our center 212 patients with first DES-ISR were treated with PCB (Restore®; Cardionovum GmbH, Bonn, Germany), whereas 230 patients were treated with SCB (Devoir®; MINVASYS SAS, Gennevilliers, France). Following a propensity matching, 186 patients were included into PCB group (PCB group), and in the SCB group (SCB group). The primary purpose of the study was the 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) rate, including cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and repeated target lesion or target vessel revascularization.

RESULTS

Procedural success occurred in all cases. Fully optimal predilation (that is, balloon-to-stent ratio >0.91, time of DCB inflation >60 sec, and residual percent diameter stenosis after lesion preparation <20%) was observed more often in the SCB group (126 [68%] patients versus 106 [57%] patients; P=0.042). One-year TLF occurred in 29 (15.5%) patients in the SCB group and in 32 (17%) patients in the PCB group (OR=1.12 [0.65-1.95]; P=0.78). By logistic Cox regression analysis fully optimal predilation (OR=0.06; 95% CI: 0.01-0.21; P<0.001) but not DCB type (OR=0.74; 95% CI: 0.41-1.31; P=0.29) was independent predictor of 1-year TLF.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study suggests that 1-year TLF is not statistically and clinically different in patients with DES ISR treated with a PCB and a SCB.

Drug-coated balloon: an effective alternative to stent strategy in small-vessel coronary artery disease-a meta-analysis

Background

Small-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently observed in coronary angiography and linked to a higher risk of lesion failure and restenosis. Currently, treatment of small vessels is not standardized while having drug-eluting stents (DES) or drug-coated balloons (DCBs) as possible strategies. We aimed to conduct a meta-analytic approach to assess the effectiveness of treatment strategies and outcomes for small-vessel CAD.

Methods

Comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies reporting treatment strategies of small-vessel CAD with a reference diameter of ≤3.0 mm. Target lesion revascularization (TLR), target lesion thrombosis, all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as clinical outcomes. Outcomes from single-arm and randomized studies based on measures by means of their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were compared using a meta-analytic approach. Statistical significance was assumed if CIs did not overlap.

Results

Thirty-seven eligible studies with a total of 31,835 patients with small-vessel CAD were included in the present analysis. Among those, 28,147 patients were treated with DES (24 studies) and 3,299 patients with DCB (18 studies). Common baseline characteristics were equally distributed in the different studies. TLR rate was 4% in both treatment strategies [0.04; 95% CI 0.03-0.05 (DES) vs. 0.03-0.07 (DCB)]. MI occurred in 3% of patients receiving DES and in 2% treated with DCB [0.03 (0.02-0.04) vs. 0.02 (0.01-0.03)]. All-cause mortality was 3% in the DES group [0.03 (0.02-0.05)] compared with 1% in the DCB group [0.01 (0.00-0.03)]. Approximately 9% of patients with DES developed MACE vs. 4% of patients with DCB [0.09 (0.07-0.10) vs. 0.04 (0.02-0.08)]. Meta-regression analysis did not show a significant impact of reference vessel diameter on outcomes.

Conclusion

This large meta-analytic approach demonstrates similar clinical and angiographic results between treatment strategies with DES and DCB in small-vessel CAD. Therefore, DES may be waived in small coronary arteries when PCI is performed with DCB.

SCAI Expert Consensus Statement on Management of In-Stent Restenosis and Stent Thrombosis

Stent failure remains the major drawback to the use of coronary stents as a revascularization strategy. Recent advances in imaging have substantially improved our understanding of the mechanisms underlying these occurrences, which have in common numerous clinical risk factors and mechanical elements at the time of stent implantation. In-stent restenosis remains a common clinical problem despite numerous improvements in-stent design and polymer coatings over the past 2 decades. It generates significant health care cost and is associated with an increased risk of death and rehospitalization. Stent thrombosis causes abrupt closure of the stented artery and therefore carries a high risk of myocardial infarction and death. This Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) Expert Consensus Statement suggests updated practical algorithmic approaches to in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. A pragmatic outline of assessment and management of patients presenting with stent failure is presented. A new SCAI classification that is time-sensitive with mechanistic implications of in-stent restenosis is proposed. Emphasis is placed on frequent use of intracoronary imaging and assessment of timing to determine the precise etiology because that information is crucial to guide selection of the best treatment option. SCAI recommends image-guided coronary stenting at the time of initial implantation to minimize the occurrence of stent failure. When in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis are encountered, imaging should be strongly considered to optimize the subsequent approach.

Simulation and Experimental Investigation of Balloon Folding and Inserting Performance for Angioplasty: A Comparison of Two Materials, Polyamide-12 and Pebax

BACKGROUND

A balloon dilatation catheter is a vital tool in percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Various factors, including the material used, influence the ability of different types of balloons to navigate through lesions during delivery.

OBJECTIVE

Thus far, numerical simulation studies comparing the impacts of different materials on the trackability of balloon catheters has been limited. This project seeks to unveil the underlying patterns more effectively by utilizing a highly realistic balloon-folding simulation method to compare the trackability of balloons made from different materials.

METHODS

Two materials, nylon-12 and Pebax, were examined for their insertion forces via a bench test and a numerical simulation. The simulation built a model identical to the bench test's groove and simulated the balloon's folding process prior to insertion to better replicate the experimental conditions.

RESULTS

In the bench test, nylon-12 demonstrated the highest insertion force, peaking at 0.866 N, significantly outstripping the 0.156 N force exhibited by the Pebax balloon. In the simulation, nylon-12 experienced a higher level of stress after folding, while Pebax had demonstrated a higher effective strain and surface energy density. In terms of insertion force, nylon-12 was higher than Pebax in specific areas.

CONCLUSION

nylon-12 exerts greater pressure on the vessel wall in curved pathways when compared to Pebax. The simulated insertion forces of nylon-12 align with the experimental results. However, when using the same friction coefficient, the difference in insertion forces between the two materials is minimal. The numerical simulation method used in this study can be used for relevant research. This method can assess the performance of balloons made from diverse materials navigating curved paths and can yield more precise and detailed data feedback compared to benchtop experiments.

Coronary Drug-Coated Balloons for De Novo and In-Stent Restenosis Indications

Drug-coated balloons are approved outside the United States, not only for the treatment of peripheral arteries but also for coronary arteries. This review describes the technological basics, the scenarios of clinical application, and the current available data from clinical trials for the different coronary indications.