Should We Use Drug Coated Balloons in Patients with Multivessel Disease?

Recent studies have shown that a drug coated balloons (DCB) based approach resulted non inferior when compared against drug eluting stents (DES) only approach in patients with instent restenosis and de novo lesions in small vessel disease. So far, two international consensuses have reported the use of DCB is feasible and safe to treat native vessels instead of DES. 

¿Debemos utilizar balones liberadores de droga en pacientes con enfermedad de múltiples vasos?

A registry of patients in South Korea has shown that a higher number of longer stents was a significant predictor of ischemic events in patients with multivessel disease. 

The aim of this retrospective study carried out in South Korea was to look at clinical outcomes of patients with multivessel disease treated with DCB or a combination of DCB and DES. 

Primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) incidence, defined as cardiac death, AMI, stroke, probable or definite stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization and major bleeding at 2 years. 

It included 254 patients meeting multivessel criteria, treated with DCB or a combination of DCB and DES. These were matched with propensity score (PSM) to 254 patients of the PTRG-DES registry (Platelet Function and Genotype-Related Long-Term Prognosis in Drug-Eluting Stent-Treated Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) to be compared against the DES-only group. 

Read also: Intracoronary Brachytherapy for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis.

Patient mean age was 63 and they were mostly men. The most frequent clinical presentation in the DES-only group was stable angina, while in the DCB-based group, unstable angina was most prevalent. Among DCB patients, 34.3% were treated with DCB only and 65.7% with the hybrid strategy combining DES + DCB. There were no differences in baseline clinical characteristics between the groups. The number of stents and total stent length was significantly lower in the DCB group vs. the DES-only group. 

As regards the primary end point, the DCB group presented lower risk of MACE vs DES-only, at 2 years. (3.9% vs 11.0%; P = 0.002).

Cardiac death was higher in the DES group (0.4% vs 2.4%; P = 0.047), and major bleeding was also more prevalent in this group (0.4% vs; 2.8%; P = 0.027). 

Conclusion

The DCB-based approach showed significantly fewer stents in multivessel PCI, which lead to reduced MACE rate at 2 year followup. These findings confirm the safety of DCB, and the long term benefit we can expect, seeing as it reduces stent burden. Further retrospective controlled studies are needed to assess the role of DCB.

Dr. Andrés Rodríguez

Dr. Andrés Rodríguez.
Member of the editorial board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: Clinical Impact of Drug-Coated Balloon–Based Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease.

Reference: Eun-Seok Shin, MD et al J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2023.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 – ECLIPSE: Randomized Study of Orbital Atherectomy vs Conventional PCI in Severely Calcified Lesions

Coronary calcification is associated with stent under-expansion and increased risk of both early and late adverse events. Atherectomy is an essential tool for uncrossable...

TCT 2024 | Use of Drug-Coated Balloons for Side Branch Treatment in Provisional Stenting

In some cases, treating coronary bifurcations with provisional stenting requires side branch stenting, which may lead to suboptimal outcomes. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have emerged...

TCT 2024 | Use of Artificial Intelligence for Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease

The current approach to chest pain mainly focuses on symptom characteristics, conducting functional tests for ischemia assessment. However, several randomized clinical trials have shown...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 | TRISCEND II

This randomized study included 400 patients; 267 were treated with EVOQUE valve and 133 with optimal medical treatment (OMT). After one-year follow-up, there were no...

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...