OBJECTIVES: We aim to evaluate the long-term efficacy of two different paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). METHODS: Between February 2011 and February 2012, all consecutive patients with ISR lesions treated with the SeQuent® Please (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) PCB or with the DIOR® (Eurocor GmbH, Bonn, Germany) PCB at our institution were prospectively included and followed up for 36months by clinical observation. The primary endpoint was the clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate at 36months. RESULTS: 65 patients with 74 ISR lesions were included. 43 ISR lesions were treated with the SeQuent® Please PCB and 31 with the DIOR® PCB. Baseline clinical, lesion characteristics and procedural data did not significantly differ between the groups. The TLR rate was significantly lower in patients treated with the SeQuent® Please PCB compared with the DIOR® PCB (4.7% vs. 22. 6%, p=0.03) at 36months. CONCLUSIONS: This registry suggests that there are differences in terms of TLR between two clinically available PCBs. The SeQuent® Please PCB demonstrated lower TLR rate compared to the DIOR® PCB at 36months follow up.
OBJECTIVES: We aim to evaluate the long-term efficacy of two different paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). METHODS: Between February 2011 and February 2012, all consecutive patients with ISR lesions treated with the SeQuent® Please (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) PCB or with the DIOR® (Eurocor GmbH, Bonn, Germany) PCB at our institution were prospectively included and followed up for 36months by clinical observation. The primary endpoint was the clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate at 36months. RESULTS: 65 patients with 74 ISR lesions were included. 43 ISR lesions were treated with the SeQuent® Please PCB and 31 with the DIOR® PCB. Baseline clinical, lesion characteristics and procedural data did not significantly differ between the groups. The TLR rate was significantly lower in patients treated with the SeQuent® Please PCB compared with the DIOR® PCB (4.7% vs. 22. 6%, p=0.03) at 36months. CONCLUSIONS: This registry suggests that there are differences in terms of TLR between two clinically available PCBs. The SeQuent® Please PCB demonstrated lower TLR rate compared to the DIOR® PCB at 36months follow up.