Drug-Coated Balloon for De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions: A Systematic Review and Trial Sequential Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Cardiovasc Ther. 2020;2020:4158363. [PMID: 32934664 DOI: 10.1155/2020/4158363]

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.

Response to pre-dilatation with POBA can predict target lesion revascularization after DCB angioplasty for de novo small coronary artery lesions

Objective

To assess the determinants of target lesion revascularization (TLR) after drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for de novo small coronary artery lesions.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled consecutive lesions from patients that were in a stable condition and had undergone successful DCB treatment for de novo small coronary artery lesions. The study endpoint was TLR and major adverse cardiac events at 12 months.

Results

A total of 68 patients with 83 lesions were enrolled in the study. Of these, 11 (13.3%) lesions required TLR. Mean ± SD pre-dilatation balloon diameters were similar in the non-TLR (2.33 ± 0.72 mm) and TLR (2.18 ± 0.36 mm) groups. A comparison of the two groups showed that post/pre-lumen area ratio during pre-dilatation (%) by plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) was significantly and negatively associated with TLR and the optimal cut-off point was 170%. Cox proportional hazard and multivariate regression analyses showed that post/pre-lumen area ratio was the only independent predictor of TLR (hazard ratio 0.9318; 95% confidence interval 0.9001, 0.9645).

Conclusion

Greater pre-dilatation using POBA, assessed as the post/pre-lumen area ratio, may be independently associated with a lower 12-month TLR rate in patients undergoing DCB angioplasty for de novo small coronary lesions.

Appropriate Surrogate Endpoint in Drug-Coated Balloon Trials for Coronary Artery Diseases

Background

The appropriateness of using late lumen loss (LLL) as a surrogate endpoint was established in drug-eluting stent (DES) studies, but it was less supportive for drug-coated balloon (DCB) trials.

Methods

Studies published until 23 June 2021 were searched from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The correlation between LLL, MLD (minimal lumen diameter), and %DS (percentage diameter stenosis) and clinical endpoints was evaluated by linear regression. Standardized effect size and its 95% CIs were used to illustrate the difference among LLL, MLD, and %DS.

Results

A total of 24 clinical trials were eligible [16 DCB vs. DES, 7 DCB vs. plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), and 1 DCB vs. DES vs. POBA]. Thirteen (54.2%) trials used LLL as the primary endpoint. LLL, MLD, and %DS all had significant associations with clinical endpoints. For DCB vs. DES trials, the number of studies that reported inconsistent results between LLL and MLD was 12/16 (75.0%) and between LLL and %DS was 10/15 (66.7%), while in MLD and %DS, it was 1/16 (6.3%). The difference of standardized effect size between LLL and MLD was −0.47 (95% CI, −0.69 to −0.25, p < 0.001) and LLL and %DS was−0.31 (95%CI,−0.43 to−0.20, p < 0.001) while in MLD and %DS, there was no difference, 0.1 (95%CI,−0.02 to 0.22, p = 0.084).

Conclusions

For DCB trials, an appropriate surrogate is associated with the control device. The traditional LLL could be used in the DCB vs. POBA trials. However, MLD/%DS should be considered a more suitable surrogate endpoint when comparing DCB with DES.

Utilization of Drug-Coated Balloons for the Treatment of Coronary Lesions in the Elderly Population

Introduction: The use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) has become more prevalent in the past few years for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and de novo lesions. The absence of foreign polymer implantations potentially shortens the duration of dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT), which can be beneficial for the elderly population. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the use of DCBs for the treatment of coronary lesions in elderly patients as compared to the younger population. Materials and methods: A database of 446 consecutive patients who underwent a procedure of DCB inflation in our institution was divided into two groups, below 70 years old and above 80 years old. We compared and analyzed the endpoints of total major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiovascular (CV) death, and all-cause mortality in both groups. Results: The difference in MACE between the two age groups was non-significant (p = 0.225); the difference in cardiovascular death was also non-significant (p = 0.086). All-cause mortality was significantly different (p < 0.0001) and can be attributed to the age of the patients. Conclusion: The utilization of DCBs for the treatment of coronary lesions may be as safe and effective for the elderly population as for the younger population and may allow a shorter period of DAPT therapy, which can lower the risk of bleeding.

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-Coated Balloon vs. Stent for de novo Non-small Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) has been an attractive option in de novo vessels. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DCB vs. stent for treating de novo lesions in non-small vessels.

Methods: Studies in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were searched (from their commencement to March 2021). This meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.3.

Results: A total of 3 random controlled trials (RCTs) with 255 patients and 2 observational studies (OS) with 265 patients were included in this meta-analysis following our inclusion criteria. It could be observed that DCB presented no significant difference in cardiac death (CD) (RR 0.33, 95% CI [0.01, 8.29], p = 0.50 in OS), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.49, 95% CI [0.09, 2.50], p = 0.39 in RCT), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR 0.64, 95% CI [0.19, 2.18], p = 0.47 in RCT) (RR 1.72, 95% CI [0.56, 5.26], p = 0.34 in OS), and late lumen loss (LLL) (SMD −0.48, 95% CI [−1.32, 0.36], p = 0.26 in RCT) for de novo non-small coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with stents, whereas minimal lumen diameter (MLD) including MLD1 (SMD −0.67, 95% CI [−0.92 −0.42], p < 0.00001 in RCT) and MLD2 (SMD −0.36, 95% CI [−0.61 −0.11], p = 0.004 in RCT) was smaller in DCB group.

Conclusion: This systematic review showed that DCB might provide a promising way on de novo non-small coronary artery disease compared with stents. However, more RCTs are still needed to further prove the benefits of the DCB strategy.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.

Safety and efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with end-stage liver disease

The prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) increases in patients with end-stage liver disease, with part of them receiving the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as a treatment option. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), a standard of care after PCI, could result in catastrophic consequences in this population. Before PCI and the start of DAPT, it is recommended to assess patient bleeding risk. Based on novel findings, liver cirrhosis does not necessarily lead to a significant increase in bleeding complications. Furthermore, conventional methods, such as the international normalized ratio, might not be appropriate in assessing individual bleeding risk. The highest bleeding risk among cirrhotic patients has a subgroup with severe thrombocytopenia (< 50 × 10⁹/L) and elevated portal pressure. Therefore, every effort should be made to maintain thrombocyte count above > 50 × 10⁹/L and prevent variceal bleeding. There is no solid evidence for DAPT in patients with cirrhosis. However, randomized trials investigating short (one month) DAPT duration after PCI with new drug-eluting stents (DES) in a high bleeding risk patient population can be implemented in patients with cirrhosis. Based on retrospective studies (with older stents and protocols), PCI and DAPT appear to be safe but with a higher risk of bleeding complications with longer DAPT usage. Finally, novel methods in assessing CAD severity should be performed to avoid unnecessary PCI and potential risks associated with DAPT. When indicated, PCI should be performed over radial artery using contemporary DES. Complementary medical therapy, such as proton pump inhibitors and beta-blockers, should be prescribed for lower bleeding risk patients. Novel approaches, such as thromboelastography and “preventive” upper endoscopies in PCI circumstances, warn clinical confirmation.