Effect of High-Dose Drug-Coated Balloon Repetition After Drug-Coated Balloon Failure.

IF 1.5 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Endovascular Therapy Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-26 DOI:10.1177/15266028231214167
Yusuke Tomoi, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Yoshimitsu Soga, Taichi Hirano, Kazuki Tsunoda, Tomonori Katsuki, Kenji Ando
{"title":"Effect of High-Dose Drug-Coated Balloon Repetition After Drug-Coated Balloon Failure.","authors":"Yusuke Tomoi, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Yoshimitsu Soga, Taichi Hirano, Kazuki Tsunoda, Tomonori Katsuki, Kenji Ando","doi":"10.1177/15266028231214167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although the optimal treatment for femoropopliteal (FP) drug-coated balloon (DCB) restenosis lesions remains debatable, the effectiveness of DCB repetition for DCB restenosis has been reported. However, the optimal DCB repetition strategy is not yet established. Thus, this study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of high-dose DCB repetition with those of low-dose DCB repetition for FP DCB restenosis lesions.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This single-center, observational study used a clinical database of 677 consecutive patients undergoing FP endovascular intervention for symptomatic peripheral artery disease between December 2018 and December 2021. Of these patients, 89 cases treated with DCB repetition for FP DCB restenosis lesions were analyzed. The primary endpoint was recurrent restenosis (re-restenosis) and the secondary endpoints were recurrent target-lesion revascularization (TLR), re-occlusion, and major adverse limb events (MALE) obtained using propensity score matching. Interaction analysis was also performed to explore the effects of the baseline characteristics on the association between high- and low-dose DCB with restenosis risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, high-dose DCB demonstrated a significantly higher freedom from re-restenosis compared with low-dose DCB repetition at 1 year (90.4% vs 40.9%, p=0.034). In addition, freedom from re-TLR and MALE at 1 year was significantly higher in the high-dose DCB group (95.0% vs 53.3%, p=0.025; 95.0% vs 54.7%, p=0.025, respectively). Conversely, freedom rates from re-occlusion were not significantly different between the 2 groups (100.0% vs 84.0%, p=0.99). No baseline characteristics or perioperative outcomes had any significant interaction effect on the association of high-dose DCB versus low-dose DCB with restenosis risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For FP DCB restenosis lesions, high-dose DCB repetition offered more favorable outcomes than low-dose DCB repetition.Clinical ImpactThis study revealed that for femoropopliteal drug-coated balloon (DCB) restenosis lesions, high-dose DCB repetition obtained more favorable outcomes than low-dose DCB repetition. In addition, there was no significant interaction effect on the association of high- versus low-dose DCB with re-restenosis risk for the baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes. This finding might be also a reason for choosing high-dose DCB repetition for FP DCB restenosis lesions in daily clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1102-1108"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231214167","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Although the optimal treatment for femoropopliteal (FP) drug-coated balloon (DCB) restenosis lesions remains debatable, the effectiveness of DCB repetition for DCB restenosis has been reported. However, the optimal DCB repetition strategy is not yet established. Thus, this study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of high-dose DCB repetition with those of low-dose DCB repetition for FP DCB restenosis lesions.

Materials and methods: This single-center, observational study used a clinical database of 677 consecutive patients undergoing FP endovascular intervention for symptomatic peripheral artery disease between December 2018 and December 2021. Of these patients, 89 cases treated with DCB repetition for FP DCB restenosis lesions were analyzed. The primary endpoint was recurrent restenosis (re-restenosis) and the secondary endpoints were recurrent target-lesion revascularization (TLR), re-occlusion, and major adverse limb events (MALE) obtained using propensity score matching. Interaction analysis was also performed to explore the effects of the baseline characteristics on the association between high- and low-dose DCB with restenosis risk.

Results: After propensity score matching, high-dose DCB demonstrated a significantly higher freedom from re-restenosis compared with low-dose DCB repetition at 1 year (90.4% vs 40.9%, p=0.034). In addition, freedom from re-TLR and MALE at 1 year was significantly higher in the high-dose DCB group (95.0% vs 53.3%, p=0.025; 95.0% vs 54.7%, p=0.025, respectively). Conversely, freedom rates from re-occlusion were not significantly different between the 2 groups (100.0% vs 84.0%, p=0.99). No baseline characteristics or perioperative outcomes had any significant interaction effect on the association of high-dose DCB versus low-dose DCB with restenosis risk.

Conclusion: For FP DCB restenosis lesions, high-dose DCB repetition offered more favorable outcomes than low-dose DCB repetition.Clinical ImpactThis study revealed that for femoropopliteal drug-coated balloon (DCB) restenosis lesions, high-dose DCB repetition obtained more favorable outcomes than low-dose DCB repetition. In addition, there was no significant interaction effect on the association of high- versus low-dose DCB with re-restenosis risk for the baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes. This finding might be also a reason for choosing high-dose DCB repetition for FP DCB restenosis lesions in daily clinical practice.

药物包被球囊失效后高剂量药物包被球囊重复使用的影响。
目的:虽然股腘(FP)药物包被球囊(DCB)再狭窄病变的最佳治疗方法仍有争议,但DCB重复治疗DCB再狭窄的有效性已被报道。然而,最优的DCB重复策略尚未建立。因此,本研究旨在比较高剂量DCB重复与低剂量DCB重复治疗FP DCB再狭窄病变的临床结果。材料和方法:这项单中心观察性研究使用了2018年12月至2021年12月期间连续677例接受FP血管内介入治疗症状性外周动脉疾病的患者的临床数据库。分析89例重复DCB治疗FP DCB再狭窄的病例。主要终点是复发性再狭窄(再狭窄),次要终点是复发性靶病变血运重建术(TLR)、再闭塞和主要肢体不良事件(MALE)。还进行了相互作用分析,以探讨基线特征对高剂量和低剂量DCB与再狭窄风险之间关联的影响。结果:在倾向评分匹配后,与低剂量DCB重复相比,高剂量DCB在1年内显示出更高的再狭窄自由度(90.4% vs 40.9%, p=0.034)。此外,高剂量DCB组1年的re-TLR和MALE自由度显著高于对照组(95.0% vs 53.3%, p=0.025;95.0% vs 54.7%, p=0.025)。相反,两组再咬合自由度无显著差异(100.0% vs 84.0%, p=0.99)。没有基线特征或围手术期结果对高剂量DCB与低剂量DCB与再狭窄风险的关联有任何显著的相互作用。结论:对于FP型DCB再狭窄病变,高剂量DCB重复治疗的效果优于低剂量DCB重复治疗。临床影响:本研究显示,对于股腘药物包被球囊(DCB)再狭窄病变,高剂量DCB重复比低剂量DCB重复获得更有利的结果。此外,在基线特征和围手术期结果方面,高剂量与低剂量DCB与再狭窄风险之间没有显著的相互作用。这一发现也可能是在日常临床实践中选择高剂量DCB重复治疗FP DCB再狭窄病变的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信