Home > Journals > Panminerva Medica > Past Issues > Articles online first > Panminerva Medica 2021 Nov 11

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

 

Panminerva Medica 2021 Nov 11

DOI: 10.23736/S0031-0808.21.04573-0

Copyright © 2021 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Paclitexel versus sirolimus-coated balloon in the treatment of coronary instent restenosis

Carlo BRIGUORI 1 , Gabriella VISCONTI 1, Marco GOLINO 1, Amelia FOCACCIO 1, Mario SCARPELLI 1, Silvia NUZZO 2, Giuseppe BIONDI-ZOCCAI 1, 3

1 Interventional Cardiology Unit, Mediterranea Cardiocentro, Naples, Italy; 2 IRCCS SDN, Naples, Italy; 3 Department of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Latina, Italy



BACKGROUND: Few studies compared paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) versus sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) in the treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) instent restenosis (ISR).
METHODS: Between November 5 2009 and October 14 2020, in our centre 212 patients with first DES-ISR were treated with PCB (Restore®; Cardionovum GmbH, Bonn, Germany), whereas 230 patients were treated with SCB (Devoir®; MINVASYS SAS, Gennevilliers, France). Following a propensity matching, 186 patients were included into PCB group (PCB group), and in the SCB group (SCB group). The primary purpose of the study was the 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) rate, including cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and repeated target lesion or target vessel revascularization.
RESULTS: Procedural success occurred in all cases. Fully optimal predilation (that is, balloon-to-stent ratio >0.91, time of DCB inflation >60 sec. and residual percent diameter stenosis after lesion preparation <20%) was observed more often in the SCB group (126 [68%] patients versus 106 [57%] patients; p = 0.042). One year TLF occurred in 29 (15.5%) patients in the SCB group and in 32 (17%) patients in the PCB group (OR = 1.12 [0.65-1.95]; p = 0.78). By logistic Cox regression analysis fully optimal predilation (OR = 0.06; 95% confidence interval = 0.01-0.21; p <0.001) but not DCB type (OR = 0.74; 95% confidence interval = 0.41-1.31; p = 0.29) was independent predictor of 1-year TLF.
CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that 1-year TLF is not statistically and clinically different in patients with DES ISR treated with a PCB and a SCB.


KEY WORDS: Balloon angioplasty; Drug-eluting balloon; In-stent restenosis

top of page