Comparative Study of Two Drug Coated Balloons: Angiographic and Clinical Outcomes

The incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) requiring repeat revascularization ranges between 5% and 10% of PCI patients receiving new generation drug eluting stents (DES). This is why the current European guidelines on myocardial revascularization recommend treating ISR with drug coated balloons (DCB) with class I recommendation, level of evidence A. DCB are mostly coated with paclitaxel because of its tissue absorption and vessel retention capabilities. One of these devices, the Dissolve DCB, a new generation device, presents paclitaxel associated with medium chain triglyceride as excipient. 

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

The aim of this multicenter, retrospective, randomized study was to compare the Dissolve DCB against the SeQuent Please DCB (paclitaxel coated balloon associated to a Iopromide as hydrophilic excipient) on angiographic efficacy and clinical outcomes in ISR patients. 

 

Primary end point was late lumen loss (LLL) at 9 months. Secondary end point was acute events rate, restenosis at 9 months, target lesion failure (TLF), target lesion revascularization(TLR), and target vessel failure (TVF). In addition, they assessed a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined by all cause death, AMI, stroke and all revascularizations.   

260 ISR patients were randomized to Dissolve DCB (N=128) and SeQuent Please DCB (N=132). Mean age was 62 and most patients were men. There were no differences between the groups as regards cardiovascular risk factors and prior adverse events. There was a significant difference in post procedural stenosis percentage, which resulted significantly higher in the Dissolve DCB (P=0.006) group. 

As regards outcomes, there were no significant differences between the groups when it came to primary end point (Dissolve DCB 0.50 – 0.06 mm vs SeQuent Please DCB 0.47 – 0.07 mm, 0.02 mm difference; CI 95%: 0.13 to 0.18 mm) with Dissolve DCB reaching non-inferiority (P=0.03). There was more restenosis in the Dissolve DCB group compared against the SeQuent Please DCB, but with no statistical significance (P= 0.19).

Read also: Drug-Eluting Balloon in STEACS: Leaving No Trace is Beneficial?

As regards primary end point, TLR and TLF rates, there were no statistical significant differences between the groups. However, TVR at 9 months was significantly higher at the expense of the Dissolve DCB (P=0.02). There were no differences in MACE.  

Conclusion 

The new Dissolve DCB resulted non-inferior to the SeQuent Please DCB in late lumen loss. However, this new device presented increase TLF and restenosis, which calls for clinical long term follow up. 

Dr. Andrés Rodríguez

Dr. Andrés Rodríguez.
Member of the Editorial Board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: A Randomized Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons for In-Stent Restenosis.

Reference: Shengwen Liu, MD et al J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2023;16:759–767.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization versus Conventional Bypass Surgery in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease continues to represent a therapeutic challenge, particularly in patients with complex multivessel disease and high SYNTAX scores,...

Comparison of strategies: NMA of IVUS, OCT, or angiography in complex lesions

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in complex lesions continues to represent a technical challenge in contemporary interventional cardiology. Angiography, although it remains the most widely...

Dynamic Coronary Roadmap: does it really help reduce contrast use?

Contrast-induced nephropathy remains a relevant complication of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), particularly in patients with multiple comorbidities and complex coronary anatomies. Dynamic Coronary Roadmap...

Long-Term Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With ANOCA: A Clinical Reality to Consider?

Chronic stable angina (CSA) remains one of the most frequent reasons for referral to diagnostic coronary angiography (CAG). In a substantial proportion of these...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TEER plus optimal medical therapy versus medical therapy alone in functional mitral regurgitation

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is a highly prevalent valvular heart disease that, in advanced stages and when left untreated, is associated with reduced quality of...

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization versus Conventional Bypass Surgery in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease continues to represent a therapeutic challenge, particularly in patients with complex multivessel disease and high SYNTAX scores,...

VECTOR: First Percutaneous Aorto-Coronary Bypass Case, a New Conceptual Approach

Coronary obstruction represents one of the most severe complications associated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation, particularly in valve-in-valve scenarios involving surgical bioprostheses, narrow aortic...