INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Paclitaxel-eluting balloons have shown high antiproliferative efficacy in the treatment and prevention of restenosis. Nevertheless, not all available devices are equally effective, which makes it interesting to compare results in a preclinical model. Our objective was to assess the preclinical efficacy and safety of different devices. METHODS: We implanted 51 metallic stents (Architect(®), iVascular) in 17 domestic swine (mean, 25 [3] kg), inserting 1 stent per major coronary artery. Stent postdilatation was performed with different control balloons (n=10) or paclitaxel-eluting balloons: paclitaxel-eluting balloon 1 (iVascular) (n=15); paclitaxel-eluting balloon 2 (iVascular) (n=16) and In.Pact Falcon(®) (Medtronic) (n=10). The restenosis rate (using angiography and histomorphometry) and vascular healing parameters (balloon-related vascular injury score, endothelialization rate, and fibrin and inflammation scores) were analyzed at 28 days. RESULTS: The distinct paclitaxel-eluting balloons showed a similar degree of stenosis at follow-up, which was significantly lower than that in the control group: diameter stenosis was 9% (12%) vs 34% (18%) by angiography (P<.0001) and was 22% (8%) vs 51% (18%) by histomorphometry (P<.0001). Scores for vascular injury (mean, 0.6 [0.5]) and inflammation (mean, 0.8 [0.3]) were uniformly low across all groups. Drug effect markers differed significantly between the paclitaxel-eluting balloons and control groups, with lower endothelialization rates (87% [10%] vs 99% [2%]; P=.0007) and higher fibrin scores (2.1 [0.7] vs 0.4 [0.5]; P<.0001) in the paclitaxel-eluting balloons groups. There were no differences between the different paclitaxel-eluting balloons. CONCLUSIONS: In this preclinical model, the paclitaxel-eluting balloons studied significantly reduced in-stent restenosis compared with the control balloons. Although there were no findings of persistent vascular injury or inflammation, delayed endothelialization and fibrin aggregate suggest a drug deposition response.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:Paclitaxel-eluting balloons have shown high antiproliferative efficacy in the treatment and prevention of restenosis. Nevertheless, not all available devices are equally effective, which makes it interesting to compare results in a preclinical model. Our objective was to assess the preclinical efficacy and safety of different devices. METHODS: We implanted 51 metallic stents (Architect(®), iVascular) in 17 domestic swine (mean, 25 [3] kg), inserting 1 stent per major coronary artery. Stent postdilatation was performed with different control balloons (n=10) or paclitaxel-eluting balloons: paclitaxel-eluting balloon 1 (iVascular) (n=15); paclitaxel-eluting balloon 2 (iVascular) (n=16) and In.Pact Falcon(®) (Medtronic) (n=10). The restenosis rate (using angiography and histomorphometry) and vascular healing parameters (balloon-related vascular injury score, endothelialization rate, and fibrin and inflammation scores) were analyzed at 28 days. RESULTS: The distinct paclitaxel-eluting balloons showed a similar degree of stenosis at follow-up, which was significantly lower than that in the control group: diameter stenosis was 9% (12%) vs 34% (18%) by angiography (P<.0001) and was 22% (8%) vs 51% (18%) by histomorphometry (P<.0001). Scores for vascular injury (mean, 0.6 [0.5]) and inflammation (mean, 0.8 [0.3]) were uniformly low across all groups. Drug effect markers differed significantly between the paclitaxel-eluting balloons and control groups, with lower endothelialization rates (87% [10%] vs 99% [2%]; P=.0007) and higher fibrin scores (2.1 [0.7] vs 0.4 [0.5]; P<.0001) in the paclitaxel-eluting balloons groups. There were no differences between the different paclitaxel-eluting balloons. CONCLUSIONS: In this preclinical model, the paclitaxel-eluting balloons studied significantly reduced in-stent restenosis compared with the control balloons. Although there were no findings of persistent vascular injury or inflammation, delayed endothelialization and fibrin aggregate suggest a drug deposition response.
Authors: Francesco Burzotta; Marta Francesca Brancati; Carlo Trani; Giancarlo Pirozzolo; Gianluigi De Maria; Antonio Maria Leone; Giampaolo Niccoli; Italo Porto; Francesco Prati; Filippo Crea Journal: Heart Vessels Date: 2015-04-12 Impact factor: 2.037