TCT 2025 | VICTORY Trial: super-high-pressure NC balloon vs. IVL in severely calcified coronary lesions

Recent studies such as ECLIPSE have demonstrated the safety of non-compliant (NC) balloons compared with orbital atherectomy, while IVL has shown efficacy in registries and non-comparative studies. Still, a direct head-to-head evaluation was needed.

The VICTORY Trial (Intravascular Lithotripsy vs. Super-High-Pressure Non-Compliant Balloon for Treatment of Calcified and Refractory Coronary Lesions) was a prospective, multicenter, randomized non-inferiority study.

Patients with acute or chronic coronary syndromes and severely calcified lesions (OCT-guided) requiring DES implantation were included. STEMI and cardiogenic shock were excluded.

Participants were randomized 1:1 to lesion preparation with OPN non-compliant balloon (OPN NCB) or IVL. The primary endpoint was percentage stent expansion (SE) by OCT. Secondary endpoints included adequate (>80%) or optimal (>90%) expansion, procedural success, strategy success, and 30-day safety outcomes.

A total of 282 patients were randomized across Switzerland, Canada, and Poland. Mean age 71 years; 25% women; 30% diabetes; 40% prior MI; ~60% multivessel disease. Most lesions showed severe angiographic calcium and ≥270° calcium burden on OCT.

Regarding the primary outcome, final stent expansion was similar between groups (mean difference: 1.0%, 95% CI −2.45 to 4.45; superiority p=0.57; non-inferiority p<0.0001), confirming the non-inferiority of OPN NCB compared with IVL. The results were consistent across subgroup analyses.

Read also: TCT 2025 | ShortCUT Trial: intravascular lithotripsy vs. cutting balloon in calcified coronary lesions.

Final SE was similar between groups (mean difference 1.0%; 95% CI −2.45 to 4.45; superiority p=0.57; non-inferiority p<0.0001). Secondary outcomes were also comparable, including procedural success (92% vs. 86%) and strategy success (98.6% both). Safety outcomes showed low perforation rates (≤1%) and infrequent MACE (2.9% vs. 8.0%; p=0.081) without significant differences.

Conclusions

OPN NCB achieved stent expansion and safety outcomes similar to IVL, emerging as a more accessible and cost-effective option for OCT-guided treatment of severely calcified coronary lesions.

Presented by Matthias Bossard at TCT 2025 Late-Breaking Clinical Trials, October 26, San Francisco, USA.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

Dr. Omar Tupayachi
Dr. Omar Tupayachi
Member of the Editorial Board of solaci.org

More articles by this author

Rolling Stone: Registry of Intravascular Lithotripsy vs Atherectomy Use in Complex Calcified Lesions

Severe coronary calcification represents one of the main challenges in performing percutaneous coronary intervention, both due to the higher risk of stent underexpansion and...

Morpheus Global Registry: Safety and efficacy of the long tapered BioMime™ Morph stent in complex coronary lesions

Percutaneous coronary intervention in long coronary lesions continues to represent a technical and clinical challenge, in which the use of conventional cylindrical stents may...

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...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism 2026

The 2026 ACC/AHA guideline for the management of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) introduces a conceptual shift by replacing the traditional “risk-based” classification with an...

How real are the adverse effects of statins? Evidence from randomized clinical trials

The safety of statins continues to be a subject of debate, partly due to the extensive list of adverse effects included in prescribing information,...

Rolling Stone: Registry of Intravascular Lithotripsy vs Atherectomy Use in Complex Calcified Lesions

Severe coronary calcification represents one of the main challenges in performing percutaneous coronary intervention, both due to the higher risk of stent underexpansion and...