Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes in Real-World Patients Between Resolute Zotarilumus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Small Vessel

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.

Clinical characteristics, risk factors, and prognostic analyses of coronary small vessel disease: a retrospective cohort study of 986 patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Coronary small vessel disease (CSVD) is often associated with significant percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) related complications, complex lesions, complex PCI, and poor long-term prognosis. We designed this retrospective study to clarify the characteristics, risk factors, and prognostic analyses of CSVD in Chinese populations.

METHODS

A total of 986 patients who underwent coronary angiography and stent implantation at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine were evaluated. Patients were grouped into CSVD or non-small vessel disease (non-CSVD) according to stent diameter. Clinical data, coronary angiography, and long-term follow-up were recorded. Multivariate logistic regression, the Kaplan-Meier method, Log-rank Test, and Cox regression model were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Alcohol consumption (OR = 0.420, 95% CI: 0.299-0.588, P < 0.001) was implicated as a negative CSVD correlation factor. CSVD was more likely to be associated with multi-vessel lesions (79.2% vs. 49.4%, P < 0.001), bifurcation lesions (24.0% vs. 12.4%, P < 0.001), chronic total obstruction lesions (29.5% vs. 9.4%, P < 0.001), and long lesions (55.2% vs. 35.7%, P < 0.001), which reduced the efficacy of revascularization (70.1% vs. 85.1%, P < 0.001). In the follow-ups, cardiac death (2.3% vs. 0.4%, P = 0.008), stroke (1.9% vs. 0.3%, P = 0.007), target lesion revascularization (5.8% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.029), target vessel revascularization (6.8% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.016), and non-target vessel revascularization (7.8% vs. 4.0%, P = 0.012) were all substantially higher in CSVD patients. Troponin I level (OR = 1.008, 95% CI: 1.004-1.012, P < 0.001), complete revascularization (OR = 0.292, 95% CI: 0.160-0.531, P < 0.001), and aspirin administration (OR = 0.041, 95% CI: 0.013-0.131, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of MACE events of all patients.

CONCLUSION

Compared to non-CSVD, CSVD was associated with more complex lesions, had worse revascularization efficacy, and a poorer prognosis.