A prospective randomized trial of the use of drug-eluting balloon catheters for the treatment of a lateral branch in patients with true bifurcation lesions

Q4 Medicine
T. K. Eraliev, D. Khelimskii, O. Krestyaninov
{"title":"A prospective randomized trial of the use of drug-eluting balloon catheters for the treatment of a lateral branch in patients with true bifurcation lesions","authors":"T. K. Eraliev, D. Khelimskii, O. Krestyaninov","doi":"10.21688/1681-3472-2022-2-86","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Endovascular interventions for bifurcation lesions of the coronary arteries account for approximately 15-20% of all coronary interventions. Despite the use of drug-eluting stents, the management of bifurcation lesions remains challenging, especially in the setting of lateral branch involvement. Although the Provisional stenting strategy is the preferred method for most patients, several studies have shown that dual-stent techniques may be advantageous in this patient population. However, as a general approach, the European Bifurcation Club recommends that percutaneous coronary interventions be performed with a minimum number of stents.Aim. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of using a paclitaxel-coated balloon in the treatment of a lateral branch in patients with true bifurcation coronary disease.Methods. This work was performed as a result of a clinical analysis and evaluation of the results of treatment of 80 patients with coronary artery disease, who underwent stenting of a true bifurcation lesion in the period from 2020 to 2021. All patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to main branch stenting followed by lateral branch dilatation with drug-eluting balloons and provisional stenting. A direct angiographic analysis was carried out before and after the intervention, and control coronary angiography was performed 12 months later with an assessment of the results obtained. All patients underwent a comprehensive clinical, laboratory and instrumental examination.Results. Pre-procedure reference main branch diameters were 2.97 ± 0.41 mm and 3.12 ± 0.38 mm in the Provisional and drug-eluting balloons groups, respectively. The degree of stenosis of the main branch before percutaneous coronary interventions was 65.2 ± 14.1% and decreased to 13.3 ± 6.6% after intervention in the Provisional stenting group. This was comparable to the results of percutaneous coronary interventions in the group of patients who used drug-eluting balloons 63.8 ± 12.3% and 12.9 ± 5.8%, respectively. The minimum diameter of the main branch after percutaneous coronary interventions increased from 1.04 ± 0.34 mm to 2.72 ± 0.44 mm in the Provisional stenting group and subsequently decreased to 2.18 ± 0.33 mm, according to control coronary angiography after 12 months. At the same time, patients who underwent intervention using drug-eluting balloons had a smaller loss of the lumen of the main branch 0.41 ± 0.33 mm versus 0.63 ± 0.32 mm (p = 0.003). In addition, late loss of lumen both in the lateral branch (0.51 ± 0.22 mm versus 0.33 ± 0.24 mm) and total in both branches of the bifurcation (1.06 ± 0.29 mm versus 0.79 ± 0.27 mm) was statistically greater with Provisional stenting.Conclusion. Treatment of bifurcation lesions using the Provisional technique with drug-eluting lateral branch dilatation has shown better results than with conventional balloons. ","PeriodicalId":19853,"journal":{"name":"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2022-2-86","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Endovascular interventions for bifurcation lesions of the coronary arteries account for approximately 15-20% of all coronary interventions. Despite the use of drug-eluting stents, the management of bifurcation lesions remains challenging, especially in the setting of lateral branch involvement. Although the Provisional stenting strategy is the preferred method for most patients, several studies have shown that dual-stent techniques may be advantageous in this patient population. However, as a general approach, the European Bifurcation Club recommends that percutaneous coronary interventions be performed with a minimum number of stents.Aim. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of using a paclitaxel-coated balloon in the treatment of a lateral branch in patients with true bifurcation coronary disease.Methods. This work was performed as a result of a clinical analysis and evaluation of the results of treatment of 80 patients with coronary artery disease, who underwent stenting of a true bifurcation lesion in the period from 2020 to 2021. All patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to main branch stenting followed by lateral branch dilatation with drug-eluting balloons and provisional stenting. A direct angiographic analysis was carried out before and after the intervention, and control coronary angiography was performed 12 months later with an assessment of the results obtained. All patients underwent a comprehensive clinical, laboratory and instrumental examination.Results. Pre-procedure reference main branch diameters were 2.97 ± 0.41 mm and 3.12 ± 0.38 mm in the Provisional and drug-eluting balloons groups, respectively. The degree of stenosis of the main branch before percutaneous coronary interventions was 65.2 ± 14.1% and decreased to 13.3 ± 6.6% after intervention in the Provisional stenting group. This was comparable to the results of percutaneous coronary interventions in the group of patients who used drug-eluting balloons 63.8 ± 12.3% and 12.9 ± 5.8%, respectively. The minimum diameter of the main branch after percutaneous coronary interventions increased from 1.04 ± 0.34 mm to 2.72 ± 0.44 mm in the Provisional stenting group and subsequently decreased to 2.18 ± 0.33 mm, according to control coronary angiography after 12 months. At the same time, patients who underwent intervention using drug-eluting balloons had a smaller loss of the lumen of the main branch 0.41 ± 0.33 mm versus 0.63 ± 0.32 mm (p = 0.003). In addition, late loss of lumen both in the lateral branch (0.51 ± 0.22 mm versus 0.33 ± 0.24 mm) and total in both branches of the bifurcation (1.06 ± 0.29 mm versus 0.79 ± 0.27 mm) was statistically greater with Provisional stenting.Conclusion. Treatment of bifurcation lesions using the Provisional technique with drug-eluting lateral branch dilatation has shown better results than with conventional balloons. 
一项前瞻性随机试验,使用药物洗脱球囊导管治疗真正分叉病变患者的侧支
背景。冠状动脉分叉病变的血管内介入治疗约占所有冠状动脉介入治疗的15-20%。尽管使用药物洗脱支架,分叉病变的管理仍然具有挑战性,特别是在外侧分支受累的情况下。虽然临时支架策略是大多数患者的首选方法,但一些研究表明双支架技术可能对这类患者有利。然而,作为一种一般方法,欧洲分支俱乐部建议经皮冠状动脉介入治疗应使用最少数量的支架。目的:评价紫杉醇包被球囊治疗真分叉冠状动脉侧支的安全性和有效性。这项工作是对2020年至2021年期间接受真分叉病变支架置入术的80例冠状动脉疾病患者的治疗结果进行临床分析和评估的结果。所有患者按1:1的比例随机分为主支支架术、药物洗脱球囊扩张侧支和临时支架术。干预前后进行直接血管造影分析,12个月后进行对照冠状动脉造影,并对所获得的结果进行评估。所有患者均接受了全面的临床、实验室和仪器检查。临时和药物洗脱气球组术前参考主干直径分别为2.97±0.41 mm和3.12±0.38 mm。经皮冠状动脉支架置入术前主干狭窄程度为65.2±14.1%,临时支架置入术后主干狭窄程度降至13.3±6.6%。这与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗使用药物洗脱球囊组的结果相当,分别为63.8±12.3%和12.9±5.8%。12个月后对照冠状动脉造影显示,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后,临时支架术组主支最小直径由1.04±0.34 mm增至2.72±0.44 mm,随后又降至2.18±0.33 mm。同时,采用药物洗脱球囊干预的患者主支管腔损失(0.41±0.33 mm)小于0.63±0.32 mm (p = 0.003)。此外,临时支架术在侧支(0.51±0.22 mm比0.33±0.24 mm)和分叉两支(1.06±0.29 mm比0.79±0.27 mm)的晚期管腔损失均有统计学意义上更大。临时技术与药物洗脱侧支扩张治疗分叉病变已显示出比传统球囊更好的结果。
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
Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya
Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信