Very late hazard with stenting versus balloon angioplasty for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a 16-year single-center experience

Optimal management of high bleeding risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: Where do we stand?

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are the mainstay of treating obstructive coronary artery disease. However, procedural planning and individualization of the procedure is necessary for different patient phenotypes to optimize outcomes. Specifically, post-PCI pharmacotherapy with antiplatelets complicates the management of patients at high bleeding risk due to comorbidities, such as atrial fibrillation. Aiming to limit post-procedural adverse events and reduce the procedure-related bleeding risk, several novel technologies and hypotheses have been tested in clinical practice. Such frontiers include limiting the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy or even prescribing single regimens, using drug-coated balloons for performing the intervention and the effect of imaging-guided PCI in optimizing stent expansion. Furthermore, specific instruction in different patient phenotypes, such as atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease, are emerging, as despite both pathologies being considered at high bleeding risk, one size does not fit all. Thus, our review will provide all the recent updates on the field as well as algorithms and expert opinions on how to manage this, particularly common, phenotype of patient.

Recent advances in targeted therapy for inflammatory vascular diseases

Vascular diseases constitute a significant contributor to worldwide mortality rates, placing a substantial strain on healthcare systems and socio-economic aspects. They are closely associated with inflammatory responses, as sustained inflammation could impact endothelial function, the release of inflammatory mediators, and platelet activation, thus accelerating the progression of vascular diseases. Consequently, directing therapeutic efforts towards mitigating inflammation represents a crucial approach in the management of vascular diseases. Traditional anti-inflammatory medications may have extensive effects on multiple tissues and organs when absorbed through the bloodstream. Conversely, treatments targeting inflammatory vascular diseases, such as monoclonal antibodies, drug-eluting stents, and nano-drugs, can achieve more precise effects, including precise intervention, minimal non-specific effects, and prolonged efficacy. In addition, personalized therapy is an important development trend in targeted therapy for inflammatory vascular diseases. Leveraging advanced simulation algorithms and clinical trial data, treatment strategies are gradually being personalized based on patients' genetic, biomarker, and clinical profiles. It is expected that the application of precision medicine in the field of vascular diseases will have a broader future. In conclusion, targeting therapies offer enhanced safety and efficacy compared to conventional medications; investigating novel targeting therapies and promoting clinical transformation may be a promising direction in improving the prognosis of patients with inflammatory vascular diseases. This article reviews the pathogenesis of inflammatory vascular diseases and presents a comprehensive overview of the potential for targeted therapies in managing this condition.

Stent, balloon and hybrid in de novo PCI: could the whole be greater than the sum of its parts?

Andreas Grüntzig, an ardent angiologist crafted an indeflatable sausage-shaped dual-lumen balloon- catheter, designed its delivery to the heart, launched minimally invasive coronary intervention and taught by beaming live demonstration. Subsequent advances are just incremental tweaks and tinkers around this fully formed framework from 1978. The near-immediate or instant feedback learning process by which the heart responds to any new invasive procedural variation facilitates each new change; be it drug- eluting stent, drug-coated balloon, or both in different combinations and permutations. Now with Grüntzig's balloon armed with an antiproliferative drug, it could dominate the field once more, as he originally envisaged.

Feasibility and Safety of Drug-Coated Balloon-Only Angioplasty for De Novo Ostial Lesions of the Left Anterior Descending Artery: Two-Center Retrospective Study

Introduction

There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty in the percutaneous treatment of complex de novo ostial coronary lesions. This study primarily aimed to explore the feasibility and safety of this innovative approach for ostial lesions in the left anterior descending artery (LAD).

Methods

Patients treated with paclitaxel DCB or second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) were retrospectively enrolled from two large centers. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization, and recurrent myocardial infarction related to target artery occlusion. Cox regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for MACE, and propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias.

Results

A total of 388 patients were included; among them, 52 were treated with paclitaxel DCB, and 336 with DES for ostial LAD lesions. Using propensity score matching, 49 patients were treated with DCB-only and 49 with the DES strategy. The average follow-up time was 12 months; subsequently, a non-significant decrease in MACE rate was observed in the DCB-only angioplasty treatment group (MACE: 6 vs. 6%, p = 1.0; TLR: 2 vs. 4%, p = 0.56). Cox regression analysis indicated that DCB-only angioplasty was not an independent risk factor for adverse events after adjusting for confounding risk factors (hazard ratio: 1.713, p = 0.43).

Conclusion

The use of the DCB-only approach is an innovative and optional strategy in the treatment of isolated ostial LAD disease. A further randomized trial is of necessity to confirm the feasibility and safety of drug-coated balloon-only angioplasty for LAD de novo ostial lesions.

Drug-eluting balloon: is it useful?

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease is one of the major issues in the medical world around the globe. The prevalence tends to increase. The use of coronary intervention is one of the ways often used in the management of coronary artery disease due to its satisfying result from earlier studies. Nowadays, there are several different techniques in coronary intervention: balloon vs stent.

MAIN BODY

The stent-based vascular interventions are increasingly being used over balloon-based coronary intervention. However, revascularization intervention using stent often have undesirable long-term effects compared to balloon. Besides, stent-based interventions are also considered more expensive, use more complicated techniques, and use more drug regimens. On the other hand, percutaneous coronary intervention techniques using balloons coated by anti-proliferation drugs have begun to be glimpsed by many interventionists. Studies have found many benefits that cannot be given by stent-based intervention therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Angioplasty using percutaneous coronary intervention techniques reveals satisfying result compared to conservative medical treatment. The indication and technique of percutaneous coronary intervention is still evolving until now. Currently, percutaneous coronary intervention using stent, either bare-metal stent or drug-eluting stent, is preferred by interventionist. Nevertheless, recent clinical trial favors the using of drug-eluting balloon for percutaneous coronary intervention in terms of both clinical outcome and complication in several scenarios.

A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Trial to Assess the Effectiveness of the MagicTouch Sirolimus-Coated Balloon in Small Vessels: Rationale and Design of the TRANSFORM I Trial

AIMS

The objective of the study is to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel Magic Touch sirolimus coated-balloon (SCB) when compared to the SeQuent Please Neo paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) for the treatment of de-novo small vessel coronary artery diseases (SVD).

STUDY DESIGN

The TRANSFORM I study is a randomized, multicenter, non-inferiority trial with the intent to enroll a total of 114 patients with a de-novo SVD (≤2.5 mm). Vessel size will be pre-screened by on-line QCA. After successful pre-dilatation without major coronary dissections (type C-F) nor Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction trial [TIMI] grade flow ≤2, patients will be enrolled in a 1:1 randomization to receive treatment with either the novel SCB balloon or the comparative PCB balloon. The balloon sizing will be selected according to the lumen-based approach derived from optical coherence tomography (OCT). The primary endpoint is 6-month mean net lumen diameter gain (6-month minimum lumen diameter [MLD] minus baseline MLD) assessed by quantitative coronary analysis (QCA) with non-inferiority margin of 0.3 mm in per-protocol analysis. The clinical follow-up will be conducted up to 1 year. The enrollment started in September 2020 and will complete in April 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

The TRANSFORM I trial will assess the efficacy of novel SCB in terms of non-inferiority to conventional PCB with a novel OCT measurement approach in patients with a de-novo SVD. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03913832.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes with drug-coated balloons vs. stenting in acute myocardial infarction

The role of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of all published studies comparing the outcomes of DCBs vs. stenting in AMI patients. Four studies with 497 patients (534 lesions) were included (three randomized controlled trials and one observational study). During a mean follow-up of 9 months (range 6-12 months), DCBs were associated with similar risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (5% vs. 4.4%; OR 1.24, 95% CI: [0.34, 4.51], p = 0.74, I² = 35%), all-cause mortality (0.02% vs. 0.04%; OR 077, 95% CI: [0.15, 3.91], p = 0.75, I² = 25%), cardiac death (0.01% vs. 0.02%; OR 0.64, 95% CI: [0.16, 2.64], p = 0.54), myocardial infarction (0% vs. 1.4%; OR 0.18, 95% CI: [0.01, 3.56], p = 0.26), and target lesion revascularization (3.7% vs. 2%; OR 1.74, 95% CI: [0.42, 7.13], p = 0.44, I² = 17%) compared with stenting. During a mean follow-up of 7 months (range 6-9 months), DCBs had similar late lumen loss compared with stenting (mean difference 0.04 mm, 95% CI [- 0.21-0.28], p = 0.77, I² = 92%). In patients with AMI, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of clinical and angiographic outcomes between AMI patients treated with DCB and DES. Larger studies with longer-term follow-up are needed to assess the clinical utility of DCBs in this setting.

Drug-Coated Balloon for De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions: A Systematic Review and Trial Sequential Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To investigate the efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment for de novo coronary artery lesions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Background

DCB was an effective therapy for patients with in-stent restenosis. However, the efficacy of DCB in patients with de novo coronary artery lesions is still unknown.

Methods

Eligible studies were searched on PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library Database. Systematic review and meta-analyses of RCTs were performed comparing DCB with non-DCB devices (such as plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), bare-metal stents (BMS), or drug-eluting stents (DES)) for the treatment of de novo lesions. Trial sequential meta-analysis (TSA) was performed to assess the false positive and false negative errors.

Results

A total of 2,137 patients enrolled in 12 RCTs were analyzed. Overall, no significant difference in target lesion revascularization (TLR) was found, but there were numerically lower rates after DCB treatment at 6 to 12 months follow-up (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.01; P = 0.06; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.41 to 1.16). TSA showed that at least 1,000 more randomized patients are needed to conclude the effect on TLR. A subgroup analysis from high bleeding risk patients revealed that DCB treatment was associated with lower rate of TLR (RR: 0.10; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.78; P = 0.03). The systematic review illustrated that the rate of bailout stenting was lower and decreased gradually.

Conclusions

DCB treatment was associated with a trend toward lower TLR when compared with controls. For patients at bleeding risk, DCB treatment was superior to BMS in TLR.

Bioresorbable Scaffold: The Emerging Reality and Future Directions

In the era of drug-eluting stents, large-scale randomized trials and all-comer registries have shown excellent clinical results. However, even the latest-generation drug-eluting stent has not managed to address all the limitations of permanent metallic coronary stents, such as the risks of target lesion revascularization, neoatherosclerosis, preclusion of late lumen enlargement, and the lack of reactive vasomotion. Furthermore, the risk of very late stent, although substantially reduced with newer-generation drug-eluting stent, still remains. These problems were anticipated to be solved with the advent of fully biodegradable devices. Fully bioresorbable coronary scaffolds have been designed to function transiently to prevent acute recoil, but have retained the capability to inhibit neointimal proliferation by eluting immunosuppressive drugs. Nevertheless, long-term follow-up data of the leading bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb) are becoming available and have raised a concern about the relatively higher incidence of scaffold thrombosis. To reduce the rate of clinical events, improvements in the device, as well as implantation procedure, are being evaluated. This review will focus on the current CE-mark approved bioresorbable scaffolds, their basic characteristics, and clinical results. In addition, we summarize the current limitations of bioresorbable scaffold and their possible solutions.

Paving the way to a bioresorbable technology: Development of the absorb BRS program

Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) combine attributes of the preceding generations of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) devices with new technologies to result in a novel therapy promoted as being the fourth generation of PCI. By providing mechanical support and drug elution to suppress restenosis, BRS initially function similarly to drug eluting stents. Thereafter, through their degradation, BRS undergo a decline in radial strength, allowing a gradual transition of mechanical function from the scaffold back to the artery in order to provide long term effectiveness similar to balloon angioplasty. The principles of operation of BRS, whether of polymeric or metallic composition, follow three phases of functionality reflective of differing physiological requirements over time: revascularization, restoration, and resorption. In this review, these three fundamental performance phases and the metrics for the nonclinical evaluation of BRS, including both bench and preclinical testing, are discussed. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Bioresorbable Polymers and Stent Devices

OPINION STATEMENT

Percutaneous coronary interventions will never become obsolete, as evolution is inherent to interventional cardiology. Current drug-eluting platforms have appreciably improved their safety and efficacy profiles in different clinical settings compared to first-generation devices such that it is difficult to consider other alternatives. However, there is definite biological plausibility to consider devices with bioabsorbable polymers and/or scaffolds. It is also an undeniable fact that many patients, based on variety of belief systems, would prefer not to have a permanently implanted device. BP DES with or without bioresorbable scaffolds offer advantages over durable polymer DES in restoring normal coronary physiology and vascular adaptive responses, resulting in late lumen gain and plaque regression. They will likely allow flexibility in treating complex CAD. However, so far, we have been able to prove non-inferiority in a selected population of patients without long-term data. Is "as good as" good enough? Are we ready to reach for the BRS or a BP DES in our catheterization laboratory based on preclinical and mechanistic data (endothelialization, OCT imaging, vasomotion) with limited human experience? I am not. While I will maximize my efforts to recruit patients in related randomized controlled trials, the technology is not ready for prime time. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine whether any or all of these devices improve long-term outcome compared to best in class DP DES. Most definitive evidence is likely about a decade away. Until then, we can learn to be disciplined implanters not only in selecting the appropriate patient but also in perfecting implantation techniques.

Drug-coated Balloon-only Angioplasty for Native Coronary Disease Instead of Stents

Coronary angioplasty has vastly improved both in technique and devices since the first angioplasty in 1977. Currently, stent implantation is used almost ubiquitously, despite being developed originally to treat vessel threatening dissections. Newer concepts including absorbable polymers or fully bioabsorbable scaffolds are constantly being developed. However, we find the concept of no permanent implant whilst still delivering a chemotherapeutic drug to reduce restenosis very attractive given the long term implications of a metallic stent, which include restenosis, late thrombosis and neo-atheroma formation. The use of a drug-coated balloon-only approach to de novo angioplasty will avoid the late thrombotic problems whilst also reducing early restenosis, simplifying the procedure and reducing the dual antiplatelet duration to 1 month. We review the current literature and highlight our practice with regard to use of drug-coated balloons in treatment of de novo coronary artery disease.

Alternative stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: improving the efficacy of primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Despite the efficacy of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in achieving epicardial reperfusion in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, it is often limited by impaired microvascular perfusion attributable to distal embolization of plaque and thrombus, and stent malappostion due to vessel constriction and thrombus apposition, attenuating the full benefits of myocardial reperfusion and resulting in unfavorable clinical outcomes. In the long run implantation of permanent metallic implants have negative effect the biological behavior of the target vessel with a continuous low device failure over the years. Recently, however, efforts have been realized to tackle these shortcomings and optimize mechanical reperfusion by improvements to stent design, as substantiated by the self-expanding stent, the mesh-covered stent and the bioresorbable vascular scaffold. In this article, we provide an overview of the role of these novel, innovatively designed, alternative devices in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.