CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Drug Coated Balloon

Abstract

Recommended Article

Sustainable Antirestenosis Effect With a Low-Dose Drug-Coated Balloon: The ILLUMENATE European Randomized Clinical Trial 2-Year Results Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small Coronary Vessel Disease: PICCOLETO II Randomized Clinical Trial Prospective, large-scale multicenter trial for the use of drug-coated balloons in coronary lesions: The DCB-only All-Comers Registry Drug-Coated Balloon for De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Drug-coated balloon for treatment of de-novo coronary artery lesions in patients with high bleeding risk (DEBUT): a single-blind, randomised, non-inferiority trial Percutaneous Treatment and Outcomes of Small Coronary Vessels: A SCAAR Report Impact of Optimized Procedure-Related Factors in Drug-Eluting Balloon Angioplasty for Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis Survival After Coronary Revascularization With Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>|

Original ResearchVolume 13, Issue 7, April 2020

JOURNAL：JACC Article Link

Percutaneous Treatment and Outcomes of Small Coronary Vessels: A SCAAR Report

A Silverio, S Buccheri, G Sarno et al. Keywords: clinical outcomedrug-coated balloonsdrug-eluting stentspercutaneous coronary interventionsmall coronary vessels

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or newer-generation drug-eluting stents (n-DES).


BACKGROUND - Notwithstanding the available evidence from a few randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses, the best device for PCI in patients with small-vessel coronary artery disease is not yet established.


METHODS - The study included all consecutive patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing PCI in Sweden from April 2009 to July 2017. A small coronary vessel was defined by a device diameter ≤2.5 mm. The primary outcomes were restenosis and definite target lesion thrombosis at 3-year follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of all-cause death and myocardial infarction.


RESULTS - The study population included 14,788 patients: 1,154 treated with DCBs and 13,634 with n-DES. Overall, 35,541 PCIs were performed using 2,503 DCBs and 33,038 n-DES. The propensity score–adjusted regression analysis showed a significantly higher risk for restenosis in the DCB group compared with the n-DES group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.027; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.537 to 2.674). Conversely, no difference in the risk for target lesion thrombosis (adjusted HR: 0.741; 95% CI: 0.412 to 1.331) was detected. The risk for all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.178; 95% CI: 0.992 to 1.399) and myocardial infarction (adjusted HR: 1.251; 95% CI: 0.960 to 1.629) was comparable between groups.


CONCLUSIONS - Because of the significantly higher risk for restenosis up to 3 years, this research suggests that DCBs are not an equally effective alternative to n-DES for percutaneous treatment of small coronary vessels.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top