Department of Cardiology, Kurashiki Central Hospital, Kurashiki, Japan.
Am Heart J. 2013 Sep;166(3):527-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.07.002. Epub 2013 Aug 13.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) for the treatment of the bare-metal stent restenosis (BMS-ISR) and drug-eluting stent restenosis (DES-ISR). METHODS: This study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized (2:1) trial conducted in 208 patients with 213 in-stent restenosis lesions (BMS-ISR: 123 lesions, DES-ISR: 90 lesions) at 13 centers in Japan. Patients were randomly assigned to a PCB group (137 patients with 142 lesions) or a conventional balloon angioplasty (BA) group (71 patients with 71 lesions). The primary end point was target vessel failure at 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Clinical and angiographic follow-up 6 months after intervention was performed in 207 patients (99.5%) with 208 lesions (97.7%). Target vessel failure was noted in 6.6% of the PCB group and 31.0% of the BA group (P < .001). Recurrent restenosis occurred in 4.3% of the PCB group and 31.9% of the BA group (P < .001). Late lumen loss was lower in the PCB group than in the BA group (0.11 ± 0.33 mm vs 0.49 ± 0.50 mm, P < .001). In PCB-treated lesions, recurrent restenosis occurred in 1.1% of patients with BMS-ISR and in 9.1% of patients with DES-ISR (P = .04). Late lumen loss was lower in patients with BMS-ISR than in patients with DES-ISR (0.05 ± 0.28 mm vs 0.18 ± 0.38 mm, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized clinical study suggested that PCB provided much better clinical and angiographic outcomes than did conventional BA in patients with BMS-ISR and DES-ISR. Drug-eluting stent restenosis was associated with poorer outcomes compared with BMS-ISR after treatment with PCB.
背景:本研究旨在探讨紫杉醇涂层球囊(PCB)治疗金属裸支架再狭窄(BMS-ISR)和药物洗脱支架再狭窄(DES-ISR)的疗效和安全性。
方法:这是一项前瞻性、多中心、随机(2:1)临床试验,在日本 13 个中心的 208 名患者的 213 处支架内再狭窄病变(BMS-ISR:123 处病变,DES-ISR:90 处病变)中进行。患者被随机分为 PCB 组(137 名患者,142 处病变)或常规球囊血管成形术(BA)组(71 名患者,71 处病变)。主要终点是 6 个月随访时的靶血管失败。
结果:207 名患者(99.5%)的 208 处病变(97.7%)在介入治疗后 6 个月进行了临床和血管造影随访。PCB 组的靶血管失败率为 6.6%,BA 组为 31.0%(P<.001)。PCB 组再狭窄发生率为 4.3%,BA 组为 31.9%(P<.001)。PCB 组的晚期管腔丢失低于 BA 组(0.11±0.33mm 比 0.49±0.50mm,P<.001)。在 PCB 治疗的病变中,BMS-ISR 患者的再狭窄发生率为 1.1%,DES-ISR 患者的再狭窄发生率为 9.1%(P=.04)。BMS-ISR 患者的晚期管腔丢失低于 DES-ISR 患者(0.05±0.28mm 比 0.18±0.38mm,P=.03)。
结论:这项随机临床试验表明,在 BMS-ISR 和 DES-ISR 患者中,PCB 与常规 BA 相比,提供了更好的临床和血管造影结果。DES-ISR 患者经 PCB 治疗后的结果较 BMS-ISR 差。
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2025-6-19
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2025-3-27
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2025-2-11
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024-12-6
J Clin Med. 2024-4-19
J Geriatr Cardiol. 2024-2-28