OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the efficacy of oversized drug-coated balloon (DCB) inflation at low pressure for the prevention of acute dissections and late restenosis. BACKGROUND: The major limitation of DCB coronary angioplasty is the occurrence of severe dissection after inflation of DCB. METHODS: Between 2014 and 2018, 273 consecutive patients were retrospectively studied. 191 lesions (154 patients) treated by oversized DCB inflation at low pressure (<4 atm, 2.4 ± 1.2 atm, DCB/artery ratio 1.14 ± 0.22; LP group) were compared with 135 lesions (119 patients) treated by the standard DCB technique (7.1 ± 2.2 atm, DCB/artery ratio 1.03 ± 0.16; SP group). RESULTS: Although the lesions in the LP group were more complex than those in the SP group (smaller reference diameter (2.38 mm vs. 2.57 mm, P=0.011), longer lesions (11.7 mm vs. 10.5 mm, P=0.10), and more frequent use of rotational atherectomy (45.0% vs. 28.1%, P=0.003), there was no significant difference in the NHLBI type of dissections between the two groups (11.5%, 12.0%, 5.2% vs. 12.6%, 12.6%, 2.2% in type A, B, and C, P=0.61), and no bailout stenting was required. In 125 well-matched lesion pairs after propensity score analysis, the cumulative incidence of target lesion revascularization at 3 years was 4.5% vs. 7.0%, respectively (P=0.60). Late lumen loss (-0.00 mm vs. -0.01 mm, P=0.94) and restenosis rates (7.4% vs. 7.1%, P=1.0) were similar in both of the groups. CONCLUSION: The application of oversized DCB at low pressure is effective and feasible for preventing late restenosis comparative to the standard technique of DCB.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the efficacy of oversized drug-coated balloon (DCB) inflation at low pressure for the prevention of acute dissections and late restenosis. BACKGROUND: The major limitation of DCB coronary angioplasty is the occurrence of severe dissection after inflation of DCB. METHODS: Between 2014 and 2018, 273 consecutive patients were retrospectively studied. 191 lesions (154 patients) treated by oversized DCB inflation at low pressure (<4 atm, 2.4 ± 1.2 atm, DCB/artery ratio 1.14 ± 0.22; LP group) were compared with 135 lesions (119 patients) treated by the standard DCB technique (7.1 ± 2.2 atm, DCB/artery ratio 1.03 ± 0.16; SP group). RESULTS: Although the lesions in the LP group were more complex than those in the SP group (smaller reference diameter (2.38 mm vs. 2.57 mm, P=0.011), longer lesions (11.7 mm vs. 10.5 mm, P=0.10), and more frequent use of rotational atherectomy (45.0% vs. 28.1%, P=0.003), there was no significant difference in the NHLBI type of dissections between the two groups (11.5%, 12.0%, 5.2% vs. 12.6%, 12.6%, 2.2% in type A, B, and C, P=0.61), and no bailout stenting was required. In 125 well-matched lesion pairs after propensity score analysis, the cumulative incidence of target lesion revascularization at 3 years was 4.5% vs. 7.0%, respectively (P=0.60). Late lumen loss (-0.00 mm vs. -0.01 mm, P=0.94) and restenosis rates (7.4% vs. 7.1%, P=1.0) were similar in both of the groups. CONCLUSION: The application of oversized DCB at low pressure is effective and feasible for preventing late restenosis comparative to the standard technique of DCB.
Authors: P L Whitlow; T A Bass; R M Kipperman; B L Sharaf; K K Ho; D E Cutlip; Y Zhang; R E Kuntz; D O Williams; D M Lasorda; J W Moses; M J Cowley; D S Eccleston; M C Horrigan; R M Bersin; S R Ramee; T Feldman Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: T Dill; U Dietz; C W Hamm; R Küchler; H J Rupprecht; M Haude; J Cyran; C Ozbek; K H Kuck; J Berger; R Erbel Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Tuomas T Rissanen; Sanna Uskela; Antti Siljander; Jussi M Kärkkäinen; Pirjo Mäntylä; Juha Mustonen; Jaakko Eränen Journal: J Interv Cardiol Date: 2017-01-23 Impact factor: 2.279