CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention extent, complexity and platelet reactivity on outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation Update on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Light of Recent Evidence: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association Outcomes after drug-coated balloon treatment for patients with calcified coronary lesions Percutaneous coronary intervention for obstructive bifurcation lesions the 14th consensus document from the european bifurcation club Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials Guidelines in review: Comparison of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes and the 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation Access Site and Outcomes for Unprotected Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database Qualitative Methodology in Cardiovascular Outcomes Research: A Contemporary Look

Clinical Trial2017 Dec 20. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:J Interv Cardiol. Article Link

Outcomes after drug-coated balloon treatment for patients with calcified coronary lesions

Ito R, Ueno K, Yoshida T et al. Keywords: calcified coronary lesions; drug-coated balloon

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - To investigate the efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) for calcified coronary lesions.


BACKGROUND - Calcified coronary lesions is associated with poor clinical outcomes after revascularization. Recently, DCB is emerging as an alternative strategy for de novo coronary lesions. However, reports describing the efficacy of DCB for calcified coronary lesions are limited.


METHODS - A total of 81 patients (96 lesions) who electively underwent DCB treatment for de novo coronarylesions were enrolled: 46 patients (55 lesions) in the calcified group and 35 patients (41 lesions) in the non-calcified group. Angiographic follow-up data and clinical outcomes after the procedure were evaluated.


RESULTS - The diameter of the DCB used was 2.5 ± 0.5 mm. No bail-out stenting was observed after DCB treatment. Rotational atherectomy was used in 82% of lesions in the calcified group. Follow-up angiography (median, 6.5 months after intervention) was performed for 59 patients (30 in the calcified group and 29 in the non-calcified group). Late lumen loss and rates of restenosis were comparable between the groups (0.03 mm in the calcified group vs -0.18 mm in the non-calcified group, P = 0.093 and 13.9% vs 3.03%, P = 0.095, respectively). The survival rates for target lesion revascularization free survival and major adverse cardiac events at 2 years were comparable between the groups (85.3% vs 93.4%, P = 0.64 and 81.4% vs 88.5%, P = 0.57, respectively).


CONCLUSION - Calcified coronary lesions might dilute the effect of DCB. However, clinical outcomes in the calcified group were similar to those in the non-calcified group.


© 2017, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.