Survival After Coronary Revascularization With Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Bruno Scheller, Davor Vukadinovic, Raban Jeger, Tuomas T. Rissanen, Sean S. Scholz, Robert Byrne, Franz X. Kleber, Azeem Latib, Yvonne P. Clever, Sebastian Ewen, Michael Böhm, Yiping Yang, Alexandra Lansky, Felix Mahfoud

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

18 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are accepted treatment strategies for coronary in-stent restenosis and are under clinical investigation for lesions without prior stent implantation. A recently published meta-analysis suggested an increased risk of death associated with the use of paclitaxel-coated devices in the superficial femoral artery. The reasons are incompletely understood as potential underlying pathomechanisms remain elusive, and no relationship to the administered dose has been documented. Objectives: The purpose of this analysis was to investigate the available data on survival after coronary intervention with paclitaxel-coated balloons from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: PubMed, Web of science, and the Cochrane library database were searched, and a meta-analysis from RCT was performed comparing DCB with non-DCB devices (such as conventional balloon angioplasty, bare-metal stents, or drug-eluting stents) for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis or de novo lesions. The primary outcome was all-cause death. The number of patients lost to follow-up was observed at different time points. Risk estimates are reported as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of 4,590 patients enrolled in 26 RCTs published between 2006 and 2019 were analyzed. At follow-up of 6 to 12 months, no significant difference in all-cause mortality was found, however, with numerically lower rates after DCB treatment (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.08; p = 0.116). Risk of death at 2 years (n = 1,477, 8 RCTs) was similar between the 2 groups (RR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.37; p = 0.478). After 3 years of follow-up (n = 1,775, 9 RCTs), all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the DCB group when compared with control treatment (RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.00; p = 0.047) with a number needed to treat of 36 to prevent 1 death. A similar reduction was seen in cardiac mortality (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.85; p = 0.009). Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, the use of paclitaxel DCBs for treatment of coronary artery disease was not associated with increased mortality, as has been suggested for peripheral arteries. On the contrary, use of coronary paclitaxel-coated balloons was associated with a trend toward lower mortality when compared with control treatments.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1017-1028
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume75
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 10 2020
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • drug-coated balloon
  • paclitaxel
  • percutaneous coronary intervention

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Survival After Coronary Revascularization With Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this