Clinical Outcome of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for the Treatment of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent In-Stent Chronic Total Occlusion

AIMS

In-stent chronic total occlusion (IS-CTO) represents a unique challenge for percutaneous coronary intervention. Whether the optimal treatment for IS-CTO is angioplasty with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) or repeat stenting with drug-eluting stents (DESs) is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of PCB angioplasty and DES repeat stenting for DES IS-CTO.

METHODS

We retrospectively included patients with DES IS-CTO who underwent successful PCB angioplasty or DES repeat stenting from January 2016 to December 2019. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Cox proportional hazards model was performed to compare the risk of MACEs between PCB angioplasty and DES repeat stenting, and to further explore the prognostic factors of patients with DES IS-CTO.

RESULTS

A total of 214 patients with DES IS-CTO were enrolled: 78 patients (36.4%) treated with PCB and 136 patients (63.6%) treated with DES respectively. The median follow-up was 1160 days, and MACEs were observed in 28.2% of patients with PCB angioplasty versus 26.5% of patients with DES repeat stenting (P = 0.784), mainly driven by TLR (21.8% vs. 19.9%, P = 0.735). There was no significant difference in the risk of MACEs between the PCB group and the DES group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-2.46, P = 0.512). Multivariate Cox analysis revealed that chronic kidney disease and ≥ 3 stent layers in the lesion were independent predictors of MACEs, while switching to another antiproliferative drug was an independent protective factor (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

PCB angioplasty was an effective alternative treatment strategy for DES IS-CTO, which had similar long-term outcomes to DES repeat stenting in contemporary practice, but both were accompanied by a high rate of long-term MACEs. Improving the poor prognosis of patients with DES IS-CTO remains a challenge.

Association of serum apoA-I with in-stent restenosis in coronary heart disease

Background

Despite use of drug-eluting stents (DES), in-stent restenosis (ISR) continues adversely affecting clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Apolipoprotein A-I (apoA-I) has athero-protective effects. However, there is a paucity of clinical data regarding the association between apoA-I and ISR. We sought to investigate whether serum apoA-I is related to ISR after DES-based PCI.

Methods

In this retrospective case control study, 604 consecutive patients who underwent DES implantation before were enrolled. Patients who underwent repeat angiography within 12 months were included in the early ISR study (n = 205), while those beyond 12 months were included in the late ISR study (n = 399). ISR was defined as the presence of > 50% diameter stenosis at the stent site or at its edges. Clinical characteristics were compared between ISR and non-ISR patients in the early and late ISR study, respectively, after adjusting for confounding factors by multivariate logistic regression, stratified analysis, and propensity score matching. The predictive value was assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and quartile analysis.

Results

In the early ISR study, 8.8% (18 of 205) patients developed ISR. Serum apoA-I in the ISR group was lower than that in the non-ISR group (1.1 ± 0.26 vs. 1.24 ± 0.23, P < 0.05). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, apoA-I was an independent risk factor for early ISR. Incidence of early ISR showed negative correlation with apoA-I and could be predicted by the combined use of apoA-I and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level. In the late ISR study, 21.8% (87 of 399) patients developed ISR. On subgroup analysis, late ISR showed negative correlation with apoA-I irrespective of intensive lipid lowering; on multivariate logistic regression analysis, apoA-I was also an independent risk factor for late ISR. In patients with intensive lipid lowering, combined use of apoA-I, stenting time, and diabetes predicted the incidence of late ISR.

Conclusions

ApoA-I was an independent risk factor for ISR, and showed a negative correlation with ISR after DES-based PCI. Combined use of apoA-I and clinical indicators may better predict the incidence of ISR under certain circumstances.

Management of in-stent restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the most common cause of stent failure after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent data suggest that ISR-PCI accounts for 5-10% of all PCI procedures performed in current clinical practice. This State-of-the-Art review will primarily focus on the management of ISR but will begin by briefly discussing diagnosis and classification. We then move on to detail the evidence base underpinning the various therapeutic strategies for ISR before finishing with a proposed ISR management algorithm based on current scientific data.

Cutting Balloon Combined with Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) has emerged as an alternative therapeutic choice for in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions. Cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) is also a strategy utilized to treat tight stenotic lesions or ISR lesions. Few studies have focused on whether CBA plus DCB could achieve a better result in lowering the incidence of recurrent ISR. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of CBA plus DCB for ISR lesions.Between August 2011 and December 2017, 681 patients (937 lesions) were diagnosed with ISR and treated with DCBs in our hospital. The CBA plus DCB group comprised 90 patients who underwent PCI with further CBA plus DCB, and the DCB alone group comprised 591 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DCB alone.Baseline characteristics, the types of previous stents, lesion type, prevalence of ostial lesion and left main lesion, and pre-PCI and post-PCI stenotic percentage showed no significant difference between the two groups. Only post-PCI reference luminal diameter and size of DCB were larger in the CBA plus DCB group. During the one-year follow-up period, late loss and clinical outcomes did not differ between the two groups before and after propensity score matching. The incidence of subtotal/total occlusion with delay flow was lower in the CBA plus DCB group after propensity score matching (4.1% versus 10.9%; P = 0.030).In these patients with ISR lesions, the clinical outcomes and the incidence of repeat target lesion revascularization were similar after treatment with CBA plus DCB versus DCB alone. Further study is warranted, including prospective, randomized comparisons.

Angiographic performance of everolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis in daily practice

OBJECTIVES

The present study aims to analyze the angiographic anti-restenotic performance of durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) in daily practice.

BACKGROUND

Randomized data is available supporting the use of drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents for the treatment of ISR; however, additional real-world data including angiographic follow-up is needed.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EES-implantation for the treatment of drug-eluting stent ISR and attended for a 6-8 months angiographic surveillance were analyzed. Off-line assessment of the angiograms was conducted at a central quantitative coronary angiographic core laboratory.

RESULTS

A total of 426 patients with ISR were treated with EES and had undergone angiographic follow-up. The mean age was 66.8 ± 9.9 years and 27.5% suffered from diabetes. A total of 459 lesions were treated. The diameter stenosis decreased from 64.3 ± 19.1% (preprocedural) to 12.0 ± 6.4% (postprocedural). At 6-8 months angiographic follow-up, the in-segment diameter stenosis was 38.3 ± 21.7% and the in-stent late luminal loss was 0.54 ± 0.74 mm in the treated area analysis. The rate of recurrent binary restenosis was 25.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of ISR, the angiographic anti-restenotic efficacy of stenting with EES is comparable to that observed in randomized clinical trials and less favorable than its performance in patients undergoing stenting for de novo disease.

Drug-coated Balloons for Small Coronary Disease-A Literature Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the interventional treatment of coronary artery disease, new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) currently are the standard treatment. In addition, drug-coated balloons (DCB) are a well-established option for the treatment of in-stent restenosis in both bare-metal stents (BMS) and DES, where DCBs deliver an antiproliferative drug without the necessity of re-implanting a stent. Since the field of use for DCB has increasingly been extended to other indications such as de novo lesions in small vessel disease (SVD), a review of literature may be useful.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent randomized trial data show good efficacy and safety for DCB in de novo lesions, especially in small coronary arteries, and confirm long-term clinical efficacy and safety up to three years. DCB are an attractive and safe option in the treatment of de novo lesions in SVD.

Is Coronary Brachytherapy Staging a Comeback for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The catheter-based coronary intervention has become a well-established therapeutic modality for obstructive coronary artery disease. However, in-stent restenosis remains a significant limitation of coronary intervention despite the use of newer devices. Intravascular brachytherapy was introduced to treat recurrent in-stent restenosis but only modestly adopted. This review will discuss the mechanism of intracoronary brachytherapy, available clinical evidence of brachytherapy in recurrent in-stent restenosis treatment, and the future of coronary brachytherapy in coronary intervention.

RECENT FINDINGS

Drug-eluting stents have an inherent limitation as they leave a permanent metal layer inside an artery when deployed. Recently, drug-coated balloon technology has emerged to treat coronary artery disease as a combination of balloon angioplasty and local drug delivery without leaving a metal layer behind. Recent European guidelines recommended using drug-coated balloons when treating in-stent restenosis treatment, while the US guidelines have not yet addressed the use of drug-coated balloons in such cases. Coronary brachytherapy is a valuable addition to treat these challenging diseases despite several logistic issues. If there are newer technologies with easier setup, such as drug-coated balloons, coronary brachytherapy resurgence is improbable in the contemporary era, although it may not become obsolete.

Influences of Stent Design on In-Stent Restenosis and Major Cardiac Outcomes: A Scoping Review and Meta-Analysis

Thanks to the developments in implantable biomaterial technologies, invasive operating procedures, and widespread applications especially in vascular disease treatment, a milestone for interventional surgery was achieved with the introduction of vascular stents. Despite vascular stents providing a solution for embolisms, this technology includes various challenges, such as mechanical, electro-chemical complications, or in-stent restenosis (ISR) risks with long-term usage. Therefore, further development of biomaterial technologies is vital to overcome such risks and problems. For this purpose, recent research has focused mainly on the applications of surface modification techniques on biomaterials and vascular stents to increase their hemocompatibility. ISR risk has been reduced with the development and prevalent usage of the art technology stent designs of drug-eluting and biodegradable stents. Nevertheless, their problems have not been overcome completely. Furthermore, patients using drug-eluting stents are faced with further clinical challenges. Therefore, the bare metal stent, which is the first form of the vascular stent technology and includes the highest ISR risk, is still in common usage for vascular treatment applications. For this reason, further research is necessary to solve the remaining vital problems. In this scoping review, stent-based major cardiac events including ISR are analyzed depending on different designs and material selection in stent manufacturing. Recent and novel approaches to overcome such challenges are stated in detail.

Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty vs. drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a comprehensive, collaborative, individual patient data meta-analysis of 10 randomized clinical trials (DAEDALUS study)

Aims

Consensus is lacking regarding the best treatment for coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). The two most effective treatments are angioplasty with paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) and repeat stenting with drug-eluting stent (DES) but individual trials were not statistically powered for clinical endpoints, results were heterogeneous, and evidence about comparative efficacy and safety in relevant subsets was limited.

Methods and results

The Difference in Anti-restenotic Effectiveness of Drug-eluting stent and drug-coated balloon AngiopLasty for the occUrrence of coronary in-Stent restenosis (DAEDALUS) study was a comprehensive, investigator-initiated, collaborative, individual patient data meta-analysis comparing angioplasty with PCB alone vs. repeat stenting with DES alone for the treatment of coronary ISR. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017075007). All 10 available randomized clinical trials were included with 1976 patients enrolled, 1033 assigned to PCB and 943 to DES. At 3-year follow-up, PCB was associated with a significant increase in the risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared with DES [hazard ratio (HR) 1.32, 95% CI 1.02–1.70, P = 0.035; number-needed-to-harm 28.5]. There was a significant interaction between treatment effect and type of restenosed stent (P = 0.029) with a more marked difference in patients with DES-ISR and comparable effects in patients with bare-metal stent-ISR. At 3-year follow-up, the primary safety endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis was comparable between treatments (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58–1.09, P = 0.152). A pre-specified subgroup analysis indicated a significant interaction between treatment effect and type of DES used to treat ISR (P = 0.033), with a lower incidence of events associated with PCB compared with first-generation DES and similar effect between PCB and second-generation DES (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71–1.60, P = 0.764). Long-term all-cause mortality was similar between PCB and DES (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.53–1.22, P = 0.310); results were consistent comparing PCB and non-paclitaxel-based DES (HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.80–2.54, P = 0.235). Myocardial infarction and target lesion thrombosis were comparable between treatments.

Conclusions

In patients with coronary ISR, repeat stenting with DES is moderately more effective than angioplasty with PCB at reducing the need for TLR at 3 years. The incidence of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis was similar between groups. The rates of individual endpoints, including all-cause mortality, were not significantly different between groups.

Clinical Outcomes of Drug-Eluting versus Bare-Metal In-Stent Restenosis after the Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent or Drug-Eluting Balloon: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have reduced the rates of in-stent restenosis (ISR) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), DES related ISR (DES-ISR) still occurs and outcomes of DES-ISR remain unclear. The objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with DES-ISR compared with patients with BMS related ISR (BMS-ISR) after the treatment of DES or drug-eluting balloon (DEB). Methods and results. We searched the literature in the main electronic databases including PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary endpoints were target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The secondary endpoints included all cause death (ACD), cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis or re-in-stent restenosis (ST/RE-ISR), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). A total of 19 studies with 6256 participants were finally included in this meta-analysis. Results showed that the rates of TLR (P < 0.00001), TVR (P < 0.00001), CD (P=0.02), ST/RE-ISR (P < 0.00001), and MACEs (P < 0.00001) were significantly higher in the DES-ISR group than in the BMS-ISR group. No significant differences were found between the two groups in the rates of MI (P=0.05) and ACD (P=0.21).

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that patients with DES-ISR had worse clinical outcomes at the long-term follow-up than patients with BMS-ISR after the treatment of DES or DEB, suggesting that DES and DEB may be more effective for BMS-ISR than that for DES-ISR. Positive prevention of DES-ISR is indispensable and further studies concentrating on detecting the predictors of outcomes of DES-ISR are required.

Outcomes of intravascular brachytherapy for recurrent drug-eluting in-stent restenosis

OBJECTIVES

To examine the outcomes of vascular brachytherapy (VBT) for recurrent drug-eluting stents (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR).

BACKGROUND

Recurrent DES-ISR can be challenging to treat. VBT has been used with encouraging results.

METHODS

We report the long-term outcomes of patients with recurrent DES-ISR treated with VBT between January 2014 and September 2018 at a tertiary care institution. The main outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the composite of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR), target lesion myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion-related cardiac death. Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify variables associated with recurrent TLF.

RESULTS

During the study period, 116 patients (143 lesions) underwent VBT. Median follow-up was 24.7 (14.5-35.4) months. The incidence of TLR, target-lesion MI, and TLF was 18.9%, 5.6%,and 20.1% at 1 year, and 29.4%, 10.5%, and 32.9% at 2 years.Initial presentation with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was independently associated with TLF (hazard ratio = 1.975, 95% CI [1.120, 3.485], p = .019). Lesions treated with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance had a lower incidence of TLR (14.3% vs. 39.6%, log-rank p = .038), and a trend toward lower incidence of TLF (19% vs. 42.6%, log-rank p = .086).

CONCLUSIONS

VBT can improve the treatment of recurrent DES-ISR, but TLF occurs in approximately one in three patients at 2 years. Initial presentation with ACS was associated with higher TLF and the use of IVUS with a trend for lower incidence of TLF.

In-stent restenosis of drug-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: Clinical presentation, angiographic features, and outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a risk factor for developing in-stent restenosis (ISR) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to examine the presentation and outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR in diabetics.

METHODS

This retrospective study included consecutive patients with clinical DES-ISR, who were hospitalized between January 2013 and December 2017 and who were grouped based on the presence or absence of DM. Clinical, angiographic features and 1-year outcomes [composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat-target lesion revascularization] were compared.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of the DM group (n=109) were comparable to the non-DM group (n=82), except for the higher prevalence of hypertension and dyslipidemia in the former (60.6% vs. 46.3%, p=0.050; 74.4% vs. 57.8%, p=0.034, respectively). Clinical presentation was similar in both groups [acute coronary syndrome (ACS): 62.4% vs. 61%, p=0.843; MI: 34.9% vs. 34.1%, p=0.918). Diabetics had a higher prevalence of stent-edge restenosis (20.3% vs. 9.2%, p=0.019). The treatment strategy was similar in both groups with 52.3% in the DM group and 57.3% in the non-DM group undergoing PCI (p=0.513). One-year outcomes of the DM group were not different from those of the non-DM group (14.7% vs. 17.1%, p=0.683). Age [hazard ratio (HR), 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.10; p=0.017], MI presentation (HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.14-4.80; p=0.020), and chronic kidney disease (CKD: HR, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.21-6.58; p=0.016) were predictors of poor outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Stent-edge restenosis is more common in diabetics. Clinical presentation and 1-year outcomes following DES-ISR are similar in diabetics and non-diabetics. Age, MI presentation, CKD, and not DM were predictors of poor outcomes following DES-ISR.

3-Year Clinical Follow-Up of the RIBS IV Clinical Trial: A Prospective Randomized Study of Drug-Eluting Balloons Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis in Coronary Arteries Previously Treated With Drug-Eluting Stents

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) of drug-eluting stents (DES).

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with DES-ISR remains a challenge.

METHODS

The RIBS IV (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloons vs Everolimus-Eluting Stents) trial is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing DEB and EES in patients with DES-ISR. The pre-specified comparison of the 3-year clinical outcomes obtained with these interventions is the main objective of the present study.

RESULTS

A total of 309 patients with DES-ISR were randomized to DEB (n = 154) or EES (n = 155). At angiographic follow-up, the in-segment minimal lumen diameter was larger in the EES arm (2.03 ± 0.7 mm vs. 1.80 ± 0.6 mm; p < 0.01). Three-year clinical follow-up was obtained in all enrolled patients (100%). The combined clinical outcome measure of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization was significantly reduced in the EES arm (19 [12.3%] vs. 31 [20.1%]; p = 0.04; hazard ratio: 0.57 [95% confidence interval: 0.34 to 0.96]), driven by a lower need for target lesion revascularization (11 [7.1%] vs. 24 [15.6%]; p = 0.015; hazard ratio: 0.43 [95% confidence interval: 0.21 to 0.87]). The need for "late" (>1 year) target lesion revascularization (2.6% vs. 4%) and target vessel revascularization (4% vs. 6.6%) was similar in the 2 arms. Rates of cardiac death (3.9% vs. 3.2%), myocardial infarction (2.6% vs. 4.5%), and stent thrombosis (1.3% vs. 2.6%) at 3 years were also similar in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3-year clinical follow-up of this randomized clinical trial demonstrates that in patients with DES-ISR, EES reduce the need for repeat interventions compared with DEB. (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloons vs Everolimus-Eluting Stents [RIBS IV]; NCT01239940).

Impact of Optimized Procedure-Related Factors in Drug-Eluting Balloon Angioplasty for Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of optimizing procedure-related factors during drug-eluting balloon (DEB) angioplasty on clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (ISR).

BACKGROUND

Although DEB angioplasty is recommended as a reasonable option for ISR, recurrent target lesion failure (TLF) still occurs in many patients after DEB angioplasty.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with drug-eluting stent ISR treated with DEB (SeQuent Please) were collected from 4 centers in Korea. The primary outcome was 2-year TLF. Procedure-related modifiable independent predictors for TLF and their best cutoff values were determined.

RESULTS

In a total of 256 patients (309 lesions), TLF occurred in 52 patients (20.3%). Modifiable independent predictors of TLF among procedure-related factors were residual diameter stenosis after lesion preparation (residual percentage diameter stenosis [%DS]), DEB-to-stent ratio (BSR), and DEB inflation time (T_inflation), whose best cutoff values were 20%, 0.91, and 60 s, respectively. TLF rates were significantly higher in groups with residual %DS ≥20% (34.7% vs. 12.5%; adjusted hazard ratio: 2.15; 95% confidence interval: 1.86 to 2.48; p < 0.001), BSR ≤0.91 (46.4% vs. 21.9%; adjusted hazard ratio: 2.02; 95% confidence interval: 1.75 to 2.34; p < 0.001), and T_inflation ≤60 s (26.2% vs. 14.0%; adjusted hazard ratio: 1.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.36 to 2.45; p < 0.001). When classifying ISR lesions by combination of procedure-related factors, TLF occurred in 8.3% in the fully optimized procedure group (residual %DS <20%, BSR >0.91, and T_inflation >60 s) and 66.7% in the nonoptimized group (residual %DS ≥20%, BSR ≤0.91, and T_inflation ≤60 s) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Residual %DS after lesion preparation, BSR, and T_inflation were the only modifiable procedure-related factors in DEB angioplasty. Fully optimized DEB angioplasty with optimal lesion preparation, prolonged inflation, and sufficient dilation may play an important role in reducing TLF after DEB angioplasty.

Do outcomes following intervention for drug-eluting stent restenosis depend on whether the restenosed stent was polymer-free or polymer-coated?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous intervention for drug-eluting stent (DES) restenosis are poorer than those in patients with bare-metal stent restenosis. It is unknown if this is related to the presence of polymer coating. We sought to compare outcomes after interventions for in-stent restenosis (ISR) of polymer-free DES vs durable polymer DES.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the ISAR-TEST 5 randomized trial who underwent repeat percutaneous intervention for ISR during follow-up were included. Angiographic outcomes at 6 to 8 months and clinical outcomes at 2 years were analyzed and compared between 2 groups according to whether the restenosed stent was a polymer-free or a durable polymer DES. Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for differences between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 326 patients with ISR were included: 220 with ISR in polymer-free DES and 106 with ISR in durable polymer DES. Angiographic follow-up was available for 83.4% of patients. No difference was observed in recurrent binary restenosis between the 2 groups (31.7% vs 27.0%; P=.38; P_adjusted=.29). At 2 years, the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat target lesion revascularization were similar between the 2 groups (35.7% vs 34.0%; HR=1.04, 95%CI, 0.70-1.55; P=.83; P_adjusted=.79). The rate of repeat target lesion revascularization was also similar in the 2 groups (29.8% vs 31.5%; HR=0.91, 95%CI, 0.60-1.39; P=.68; P_adjusted=.62).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing reintervention for DES-ISR, we found no evidence of differences in outcomes according to whether the restenosed stent was a polymer-free or durable polymer DES.

Neointimal Modification With Scoring Balloon and Efficacy of Drug-Coated Balloon Therapy in Patients With Restenosis in Drug-Eluting Coronary Stents: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare neointimal modification with scoring balloon pre-dilation before drug-coated balloon (DCB) versus DCB standard therapy in patients presenting with drug-eluting stent (DES) restenosis.

BACKGROUND

DCB angioplasty for the treatment of coronary drug-eluting stent restenosis has demonstrated encouraging results. The efficacy of DCB treatment relies on rapid initial drug transfer and tissue retention of the antiproliferative drug. Neointimal modification with scoring balloon pre-dilation may enhance the efficacy of DCB therapy.

METHODS

In this randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial, 252 patients with clinically significant DES restenosis were enrolled at 4 centers in Germany. Patients undergoing DCB angioplasty were randomly assigned to treatment with scoring balloon pre-dilation or standard therapy. The primary endpoint of the study was in-segment percentage diameter stenosis on 6- to 8-month follow-up angiography. The secondary endpoints included binary angiographic restenosis and late lumen loss on follow-up angiography, the combined incidence of death or myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and target lesion thrombosis at 1 year.

RESULTS

Follow-up angiographic data at 6 to 8 months were available for 203 patients (80.6%). Scoring balloon pre-dilation compared with standard therapy showed significantly lower rates with respect to the primary endpoint (35.0 ± 16.8% vs. 40.4 ± 21.4%; p = 0.047) and binary angiographic restenosis (18.5% vs. 32.0%; p = 0.026). Late lumen loss was numerically lower after scoring balloon pre-dilation compared with standard therapy (0.31 ± 59 mm vs. 0.41 ± 0.74 mm; p = 0.27). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of death or myocardial infarction (4.0% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.73). Scoring balloon versus standard therapy showed comparable rates of target lesion revascularization (16.2% vs. 21.8%; p = 0.26). No target lesion thrombosis occurred out to 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients presenting with drug-eluting stent restenosis, neointimal modification with scoring balloon improves the antirestenotic efficacy of DCB therapy. (Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Optimizing Treatment of Drug Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis 4 [ISAR-DESIRE 4]; NCT01632371).

Percutaneous coronary intervention of lesions with in-stent restenosis: A report from the ADAPT-DES study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data from large contemporary cohorts of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) treated with drug-eluting stents (DESs), and no studies have examined the impact of high platelet reactivity (HPR) on the occurrence of ischemic events after ISR percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DESs. We sought to report outcomes after PCI of ISR lesions and its association with HPR.

METHODS

Patients in the prospective, multicenter ADAPT-DES study were stratified according to whether they had ISR versus non-ISR PCI. Two-year outcomes were compared between the groups using Cox proportional hazards models. HPR was defined as on-clopidogrel P2Y12 platelet reaction units >208 as measured by the VerifyNow assay; target vessel failure (TVF) was defined as the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization.

RESULTS

Among the 8,582 patients included in the ADAPT-DES study, 840 (9.8%) patients underwent successful ISR PCI. ISR PCI was independently associated with a higher 2-year risk of TVF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.95; 95% CI 1.68-2.27; P<.001) and stent thrombosis (adjusted HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.08-3.51; P=.027) but not bleeding (adjusted HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.73-1.21; P=.64). There was no statistical interaction between HPR and ISR versus non-ISR PCI in regard to TVF (adjusted P_interaction=.81).

CONCLUSIONS

ISR PCI is associated with a considerably higher risk of 2-year adverse ischemic events, with HPR conferring similar risk in ISR and non-ISR PCI. More effective therapeutic strategies for managing ISR lesions are necessary.

Therapeutic Options for In-Stent Restenosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In-stent restenosis (ISR) is a complex disease process that became apparent shortly after the introduction of stents into clinical practice. This review seeks to define in-stent restenosis (ISR) as well as to summarize the major treatment options that have been developed and studied over the past two decades.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent developments in drug-coated balloons and bioresorbable vascular scaffolds have added new potential treatments for ISR. Two recent network meta-analyses performed a head-to-head comparison of all the various treatment modalities in order to identify the best approach to management of ISR. Current data suggests that repeat stenting with second-generation drug-eluting stents is most likely to lead to the best angiographic and clinical outcomes. In situations where repeat stenting is not preferable, drug-coated balloon therapy seems to be a reasonably effective alternative.

Current Management of In-Stent Restenosis

Despite the advent of the drug-eluting stents (DES) and improved stent design, in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a challenging problem. The currently available options for treatment of ISR include angioplasty alone, repeat stenting with DES or drug-coated balloons. Several recent studies have compared the available options for treating ISR in an attempt to identify the preferred therapeutic strategy. In this review, we will discuss the currently available therapeutic strategies for the management of patients with ISR and the evidence supporting their use.

Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Bare-Metal and Drug-Eluting In-Stent Restenosis: Results From a Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of the RIBS IV and V Trials

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) is more challenging than that of patients with bare-metal stent ISR. However, the results of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in these distinct scenarios remain unsettled.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A pooled analysis of the RIBS IV (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) and RIBS V (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) randomized trials was performed using patient-level data to compare the efficacy of EES in bare-metal stent ISR and DES-ISR. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical in both trials. Results of 94 patients treated with EES for bare-metal stent ISR were compared with those of 155 patients treated with EES for DES-ISR. Baseline characteristics were more adverse in patients with DES-ISR, although they presented later and more frequently with a focal pattern. After intervention, minimal lumen diameter (2.22±0.5 versus 2.38±0.5 mm, P=0.01) was smaller in the DES-ISR group. Late angiographic findings (89.3% of eligible patients), including minimal lumen diameter (2.03±0.7 versus 2.36±0.6 mm, P<0.001) and diameter stenosis (23±22 versus 13±17%, P<0.001) were poorer in patients with DES-ISR. Results were consistent in the in-segment and in-lesion analyses. On multiple linear regression analysis, minimal lumen diameter at follow-up remained significantly smaller in patients with DES-ISR. Finally, at 1-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), mortality (2.6 versus 0%, P<0.01) and need for target vessel revascularization (8 versus 2%, P=0.03) were higher in the DES-ISR group.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient-level pooled analysis of the RIBS IV and RIBS V randomized clinical trials suggests that EES provide favorable outcomes in patients with ISR. However, the results of EES are less satisfactory in patients with DES-ISR than in those with bare-metal stent ISR.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01239953 and NCT01239940.

The SABRE Trial (Sirolimus Angioplasty Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis): Angiographic Results and 1-Year Clinical Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this first-in-human study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of the Virtue sirolimus-eluting balloon in a cohort of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).

BACKGROUND

Angioplasty balloons coated with the cytotoxic drug paclitaxel have been widely used for ISR treatment. The Virtue angioplasty balloon (Caliber Therapeutics, New Hope, Pennsylvania) delivers sirolimus in a nanoencapsulated liquid formulation. This clinical trial is the first to examine a sirolimus-eluting balloon for ISR.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-arm feasibility study at 9 European centers, 50 ISR patients were treated with the Virtue balloon. Angiographic measurements at 6 months are reported, along with 12-month clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

Procedural success in the intention-to-treat population was 100%. The primary safety endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization) assessed at 30 days (0%, n = 50). The primary performance endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 6 months (0.31 ± 0.52 mm; n = 47). Secondary 6-month endpoints include binary restenosis (19.1%), diameter stenosis (30.3 ± 19.9%), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (10.2%, n = 49). In the 36-patient per-protocol population (excluding major protocol violations and previously stented ISR), LLL was 0.12 ± 0.33 mm at 6 months. Clinical outcomes at 1 year for the intention-to-treat group were 12.2% TLF and 14.3% MACE and for the per-protocol population were 2.8% TLF and 2.8% MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-in-human study showed excellent procedural success for the Virtue sirolimus-eluting angioplasty balloon, 6-month LLL rates in line with current stent-free ISR treatment options, and clinical outcomes that warrant further evaluation in dedicated randomized studies.

Bilayered Nanoparticles with Sequential Release of VEGF Gene and Paclitaxel for Restenosis Inhibition in Atherosclerosis

Complete reendothelialization followed by inhibition of smooth muscle cell (SMC) proliferation is considered as an effective therapeutic option to prevent restenosis. We have designed poly(lactide-co-glycolide)-loaded bilayered nanoparticles (NPs) with the ability to sequentially release vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-encoding plasmids from the outer layer and paclitaxel (PTX) from the core to promote endothelial regeneration as well as prevent restenosis. Comparing with conventional NPs, which release VEGF plasmid and PTX simultaneously, we expect that the bilayered NPs could release the VEGF plasmid more rapidly, followed by a delayed release of PTX, resulting in an efficient VEGF gene transfection, which ideally could promote reendothelialization and inhibit excessive SMC growth. Indeed, in the present study, we have observed efficient gene transfection using a model plasmid as well as cell growth attenuation in vitro using Chinese hamster ovary cells. Therapeutic efficacy of the bilayered NPs on restenosis was further evaluated in vivo using a rabbit model of atherosclerosis. The bilayered NPs were administered locally via balloon angioplasty to the injured aortic wall through perfusion. Twenty-eight days after the NP administration, rabbits treated with the bilayered NPs exhibited rapid reendothelialization and inhibition of restenosis, as demonstrated by histological analysis. Increased level of VEGF and decreased level of C-reactive protein, a biological marker that is closely related to atherosclerosis, were also observed from animals treated with the bilayered NPs, implicating ameliorated atherosclerosis. Our results suggest that the VEGF plasmid-/PTX-loaded bilayered NPs exert a beneficial impact on atherosclerotic restenosis by sequentially releasing VEGF and PTX in vivo.

Drug-coated balloons for the treatment of in-stent restenosis in diabetic patients: A review of currently available scientific data

After the introduction of drug eluting stent (DES) the rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) has decreased if compared to the BMS era; however, treatment of patients with ISR remained a major issue for the interventional cardiologist. DES has been largely used with good results also as second layer for the treatment of ISR, but the overall percentage of patients suffering from restenosis still remains high, especially in some subgroups of patients as ones with diabetes mellitus (DM). In this clinical scenario, drug coated balloon (DCB) has been gaining an important role for the treatment of ISR. In fact, it allows to release an antiproliferative drug, namely paclitaxel, without the addition of a second metallic strut, which can lead to a persistent inflammatory stimulus and further narrow the vessel. This could be an advantage in patients with an already increased systemic inflammatory burden and stiffer vessels as those with DM. Despite differences in terms of efficacy and safety between DES and DCB have already been evaluated in different clinical trials, just few of these focused on diabetic patients. The aim of this paper is to review the available data for treatment of ISR both with DES, DCB, and a comparison between these two devices, in patients affected by DM. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Usefulness of Drug-Eluting Balloons for Bare-Metal and Drug-Eluting In-Stent Restenosis (from the RIBS IV and V Randomized Trials)

Treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) is particularly challenging. We sought to compare results of drug-eluting balloons in patients with DES-ISR with those in patients with bare-metal stent (BMS) ISR. A pooled analysis of the Restenosis Intra-Stent: Drug-Eluting Balloon versus Everolimus-Eluting Stent IV and V randomized trials was performed. Both trials had identical inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results of drug-eluting balloons in 95 patients with BMS-ISR and 154 patients with DES-ISR were compared. Patients with DES-ISR were more frequently diabetics, presented more often as an acute coronary syndrome and had more severe lesions and more frequently a focal pattern, including edge-ISR. Late angiographic findings (92% of eligible patients), including minimal lumen diameter (1.80 ± 0.6 vs 2.01 ± 0.6 mm, p = 0.001; absolute mean difference 0.21 mm; 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.38; p = 0.014) and restenosis rate (19% vs 9.5%, p <0.05) were poorer in DES-ISR. Results were consistent across 10 prespecified subgroups. Moreover, on multiple linear regression analysis, minimal lumen diameter at follow-up remained significantly smaller in patients with DES-ISR after adjusting for potential confounders (adjusted absolute mean difference 0.17 mm; 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.41; p = 0.019). Finally, at 1-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), rates of target vessel revascularization (16% vs 6%, p = 0.02) and of the main combined clinical end point (18% vs 8%, p = 0.03) were significantly higher in patients treated for DES-ISR. In conclusion, this study confirms the efficacy of DEB for patients with ISR. However, the long-term clinical and angiographic results of DEB are poorer in patients with DES-ISR than in those with BMS-ISR. (ClinicalTrials.govIdentifier:NCT01239953&NCT01239940).

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation for the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A Multicenter Italian Experience

BACKGROUND

Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is still challenging. In this setting, the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) seems attractive because it allows drug delivery combined with transient vessel scaffolding. We aimed to investigate the long-term results after BVS use in ISR lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A prospective analysis was performed on all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with BVS implantation for ISR at 7 Italian Centers. Primary end point was the device-oriented composite end point (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) at the longest follow-up available. From April 2012 to June 2014, 116 patients (127 lesions) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for ISR with BVS implantation. Among the ISR lesions, the majority were drug-eluting stent ISR (78, 61.6%), de novo ISR (92, 72.4%), and diffuse ISR (81, 63.8%). Procedural success was achieved for all (100%) patients. No in-hospital death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization occurred. At 15 months of follow-up, the incidence of the device-oriented composite end point estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method was 9.1%. No significant differences were reported between drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent ISR groups in terms of device-oriented composite end point (10.9% versus 6.4%; hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-6.5; P=0.425) and its singular components (cardiac death: 2.8% versus 2.0%, hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-14.1, P=0.843; target vessel myocardial infarction: 1.5% versus 0%, P=0.421; ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization: 9.6% versus 4.4%, hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-10.8, P=0.309).

CONCLUSIONS

Our registry suggests that the use of BVS implantation for the treatment of complex drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent ISR lesions might be associated with acceptable long-term clinical outcomes.

Understanding and managing in-stent restenosis: a review of clinical data, from pathogenesis to treatment

The lumen diameter reduction after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is well known as "restenosis". This phenomenon is due to vessel remodeling/recoil in case of no-stent strategy or, in case of stent employ, "neointimal proliferation" that consists in an excessive tissue proliferation in the luminal surface of the stent otherwise by a further new-occurring atherosclerotic process called "neoatherosclerosis". The exact incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is not easy to determine caused by different clinical, angiographic and operative factors. In the pre-stent era the occurrence of restenosis ranged between 32-55% of all angioplasties, and drop to successively 17-41% in the bare metal stents (BMS) era. The advent of drug-eluting stent (DES), especially 2nd generation, and drug-coated balloon (DCB) further reduce restenosis rate until <10%. We here review the main characteristics of this common complication of coronary interventions, from its pathogenesis to the most appropriate treatment strategy.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Everolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Drug-Eluting Balloons in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis (from the RIBS IV and V Randomized Clinical Trials)

Treatment of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a challenge. This study sought to compare the efficacy of everolimus-eluting stents (EESs) and drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) with paclitaxel in patients with ISR. A pooled analysis of the Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent (RIBS IV) and Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare-Metal Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent (RIBS V) randomized trials was performed using patient-level data. In both trials, EESs were compared with DEBs in patients with ISR (RIBS V included 189 patients with bare-metal ISR; RIBS IV included 309 patients with drug-eluting ISR). Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical in both trials. A total of 249 patients were allocated to EES and 249 to DEB. Clinical follow-up at 1 year was obtained in all (100%) patients and late angiography (median 249 days) in 91% of eligible patients. Compared with patients treated with DEBs, patients treated with EESs obtained better short-term results (postprocedural minimal lumen diameter 2.28 ± 0.5 vs 2.12 ± 0.4 mm, p <0.0001). At follow-up, patients treated with EESs had larger in-segment minimal lumen diameter (primary end point 2.16 ± 0.7 vs 1.88 ± 0.6 mm, p <0.0001; absolute mean difference 0.28 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16 to 0.40) and net lumen gain (1.33 ± 0.6 vs 1.00 ± 0.7 mm, p <0.0001) and had lower %diameter stenosis (19 ± 21% vs 28 ± 22%, p <0.0001) and binary restenosis rate (8.7% vs 15.7%, p = 0.02). Consistent results were observed in the in-lesion analysis. No interactions were found between the underlying stent type and treatment effects. At 1-year clinical follow-up, the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization was significantly reduced in the EES arm (8.8% vs 14.5%, p = 0.03; hazard ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.94) mainly driven by a lower need for target vessel revascularization (6% vs 12.4%, p = 0.01, hazard ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.86). This pooled analysis of the RIBS IV and RIBS V randomized trials demonstrates the superiority of EES over DEB in the treatment of patients with ISR.

Paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of patients with in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis of angiographic and clinical data

Paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) have become attractive alternative treatment options for patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR); however, the safety and efficacy of PCBs in comparison with those of conventional therapies are less well defined. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of PCBs for patients with ISR using comparisons with control groups. Electronic databases, such as MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were searched, and eligible studies that compared PCBs with uncoated balloons (UCBs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs) in patients with ISR were considered. Subgroup analyses were performed with different control groups. Nine studies (1,488 patients, 1,608 lesions) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with patients who underwent UCB angioplasty, those who underwent PCB angioplasty exhibited a clear superiority in late lumen loss (LLL) [weighted mean difference (WMD), -0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), (-0.59)-(-0.34); P<0.00001] and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) [odds ratio (OR), 0.21; 95% CI, 0.13-0.33; P<0.00001]. The OR for myocardial infarction (MI) (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.15-1.47; P=0.19) did not reach statistical significance. PCBs were associated with similar outcomes when compared with DESs with regard to LLL (WMD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.18-0.10; P=0.57), MACEs (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.36-1.53; P=0.42) and the ORs for all endpoints, including total mortality, target lesion revascularization, MI, stent thrombosis and binary restenosis, and no statistically significant differences were found. This meta-analysis showed that PCBs are associated with superior outcomes when compared with UCBs in the management of ISR, and are at least as efficacious and as well tolerated as DESs.

Current treatment of in-stent restenosis

Management of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains an important clinical problem. Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have drastically reduced the incidence of ISR, treatment of DES-ISR is particularly challenging. ISR mainly results from aggressive neointimal proliferation, but recent data also suggest that neoatherosclerosis may play an important pathophysiological role. Intracoronary imaging provides unique insights to unravel the underlying substrate of ISR and may be used to guide repeated interventions. In this paper, we systematically reviewed clinical trial data with currently available therapeutic modalities, including DES and drug-coated balloons, in patients presenting with ISR within bare-metal stents or DES.