CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Drug Coated Balloon

Abstract

Recommended Article

Optical Coherence Tomography Predictors for Recurrent Restenosis After Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis Therapeutic Options for In-Stent Restenosis Clinical and angiographic outcomes of coronary dissection after paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty for small vessel coronary artery disease Treatment strategies for coronary in-stent restenosis: systematic review and hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis of 24 randomised trials and 4880 patients Comparison of drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloon for the treatment of drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis: A randomized RESTORE trial Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Feasibility Study Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small-Vessel Disease: The RESTORE SVD China Randomized Trial Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Drug-Eluting Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction: The REVELATION Randomized Trial

Clinical Trial2018 Dec 10;11(23):2381-2392.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small-Vessel Disease: The RESTORE SVD China Randomized Trial

Tang Y, Qiao S, RESTORE SVD China Investigators. Keywords: drug-coated balloon; drug-eluting stent(s); percentage diameter stenosis; small-vessel disease

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to evaluate the angiographic efficacy and clinical outcomes of the Restore paclitaxel-coated balloon in a randomized trial designed to enable its approval with an indication for small-vessel disease (SVD).

 

BACKGROUND - Higher rates of restenosis and stent thrombosis limit the effectiveness of drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment of SVD. Whether a drug-coated balloon (DCB)-only strategy is effective in de novo SVD is not yet established.

 

METHODS - In the noninferiority RESTORE SVD China trial, eligible patients with reference vessel diameter 2.25 and 2.75 mm were randomized to the Restore DCB or the RESOLUTE Integrity DES in a 1 : 1 ratio stratified by diabetes and number of lesions treated. Patients with RVD 2.00 and <2.25 mm were enrolled in a nested very small vessel registry. Angiographic and clinical follow-up were planned at 9 months and 1 year, respectively, in all patients. The study was powered for the primary endpoint of 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis.

 

RESULTS - Between August 2016 and June 2017, a total of 230 subjects at 12 sites were randomized to the DCB group (n = 116) or DES group (n = 114); 32 patients were treated with the DCB in the very small vessel cohort. Nine-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis was 29.6 ± 2.0% with the DCB versus 24.1 ± 2.0% with the DES; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 10.9%, achieving noninferiority of the DCB compared with the DES (p for noninferiority < 0.001). The DCB and DES had comparable 1-year rates of target lesion failure (4.4% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.72).

 

CONCLUSIONS - In this multicenter randomized trial, the Restore DCB was noninferior to the RESOLUTE DES for 9-month in-segment percentage diameter stenosis. (Assess the Efficacy and Safety of RESTORE Paclitaxel Eluting Balloon Versus RESOLUTE Zotarolimus Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Small Coronary Vessel Disease; NCT02946307).

 

Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.