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

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...

Perforation Management in Bifurcations: Bench Testing of Bailout with Covered Stents

Coronary perforations during PCI are one of the most dreaded complications in interventional cardiology, especially in bifurcations. Though rate, this critical situation requires an...

EMERALD II: Non-Invasive Coronary Anatomy and Physiology (CCTA) in ACS Prediction

Despite steady progress in secondary prevention and medical treatment optimization (OMT), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains one of the leading causes of cardiovascular morbimortality....

Left or Right Transradial Approach? Comparing Radiation Exposure in Coronary Procedures

Radiation exposure during percutaneous procedures is a problem both for patients and operators. The transradial is currently the preferred approach, vs. femoral; however, whether...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Endoleaks after endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms: always reintervene or monitor with CTA?

Endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms requiring sealing above the renal arteries, with preservation of visceral vessels using fenestrated and/or branched devices (F/B-EVAR), has become...

Is it safe to use negative chronotropic drugs early after TAVI?

TAVI is associated with a relevant incidence of conduction system disturbances and the development of atrioventricular block that may require permanent pacemaker implantation. Many...

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...