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

ACC 2026 | ALL-RISE Trial: Coronary Physiological Assessment Using FFRangio

Coronary physiological assessment using pressure-wire techniques (FFR/iFR) carries a Class IA recommendation in ACC/AHA guidelines; however, its use remains limited due to factors such...

ACC 2026 | PRO-TAVI Trial: Deferring Coronary Angioplasty in Patients Undergoing TAVI

Coronary artery disease is common in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI. Current guidelines recommend considering revascularization in significant coronary lesions, particularly in...

ACC 2026 | CHIP-BCIS3: Impella use as support in high-risk complex PCI

The use of percutaneous ventricular support during high-risk complex PCI has been proposed as a strategy to prevent hemodynamic deterioration in patients with severe...

ACC 2026 | ORBITA-CTO: PCI in chronic total occlusions and stable angina — the randomized trial we were missing?

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusions (CTO) remains a topic of ongoing debate in stable angina, with persistent uncertainty regarding its role...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

ACC 2026 | ALL-RISE Trial: Coronary Physiological Assessment Using FFRangio

Coronary physiological assessment using pressure-wire techniques (FFR/iFR) carries a Class IA recommendation in ACC/AHA guidelines; however, its use remains limited due to factors such...

ACC 2026 | Protect The Head-To-Head Trial: Randomized Comparison Between Emboliner and Sentinel During TAVI

Ischemic stroke remains one of the most feared complications of TAVI, with a relatively low but persistent incidence of 2–4%, without significant reduction over...

ACC 2026 | PRO-TAVI Trial: Deferring Coronary Angioplasty in Patients Undergoing TAVI

Coronary artery disease is common in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI. Current guidelines recommend considering revascularization in significant coronary lesions, particularly in...