Gal Sella MD , Chloe Kharsa MD, MSc , Mangesh Kritya MD , Devin Olek MS , Bin S. Teh MD , Muhammad Faraz Anwaar MD , Joseph Elias MD , Elia El Hajj MD , Albert E. Raizner MD , Andrew Farach MD , Neal S. Kleiman MD , Alpesh Shah MD
{"title":"冠状动脉血管内近距离治疗前病变准备:普通球囊与切割/评分球囊血管成形术的比较","authors":"Gal Sella MD , Chloe Kharsa MD, MSc , Mangesh Kritya MD , Devin Olek MS , Bin S. Teh MD , Muhammad Faraz Anwaar MD , Joseph Elias MD , Elia El Hajj MD , Albert E. Raizner MD , Andrew Farach MD , Neal S. Kleiman MD , Alpesh Shah MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jscai.2025.103858","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Coronary intravascular brachytherapy (IVBT) has remained as an effective treatment for recurrent in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, optimal lesion preparation techniques prior to radiation delivery remain undefined. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of IVBT after lesion preparation with either plain balloon angioplasty or cutting/scoring balloon angioplasty.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a retrospective analysis of 219 patients who underwent vascular brachytherapy for coronary ISR between June 2016 and January 2024 at the Houston Methodist Hospital. Patients were stratified based on the type of balloon used for lesion preparation: plain balloon (n = 140) or cutting/scoring balloon (n = 79). The primary end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1 year. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiovascular events, stent thrombosis, and bleeding complications.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for older age in the cutting/scoring balloon group (67.0 ± 11.0 vs 64.0 ± 10.3 years; <em>P</em> = .047). Lesion length was comparable (28.01 ± 18.62 vs 26.49 ± 17.16 mm; <em>P</em> = .55). At 1-year follow-up, TLR rates were similar (26.6% vs 17.9%; <em>P</em> = .17), as were major adverse cardiovascular event rates (32.9% vs 35.0%; <em>P</em> = .86).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We observed no significant difference in 1-year and 3-year clinical outcomes compared to conventional plain balloon angioplasty. The trend toward higher TLR rates in the cutting/scoring balloon group warrants further investigation in larger, prospective studies. These findings suggest that lesion-specific factors, rather than balloon type alone, may be more important determinants of outcomes after IVBT for ISR.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73990,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions","volume":"4 9","pages":"Article 103858"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lesion Preparation Before Coronary Intravascular Brachytherapy: A Comparison of Plain Balloon Versus Cutting/Scoring Balloon Angioplasty\",\"authors\":\"Gal Sella MD , Chloe Kharsa MD, MSc , Mangesh Kritya MD , Devin Olek MS , Bin S. Teh MD , Muhammad Faraz Anwaar MD , Joseph Elias MD , Elia El Hajj MD , Albert E. Raizner MD , Andrew Farach MD , Neal S. Kleiman MD , Alpesh Shah MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jscai.2025.103858\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Coronary intravascular brachytherapy (IVBT) has remained as an effective treatment for recurrent in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, optimal lesion preparation techniques prior to radiation delivery remain undefined. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of IVBT after lesion preparation with either plain balloon angioplasty or cutting/scoring balloon angioplasty.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a retrospective analysis of 219 patients who underwent vascular brachytherapy for coronary ISR between June 2016 and January 2024 at the Houston Methodist Hospital. Patients were stratified based on the type of balloon used for lesion preparation: plain balloon (n = 140) or cutting/scoring balloon (n = 79). The primary end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1 year. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiovascular events, stent thrombosis, and bleeding complications.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for older age in the cutting/scoring balloon group (67.0 ± 11.0 vs 64.0 ± 10.3 years; <em>P</em> = .047). Lesion length was comparable (28.01 ± 18.62 vs 26.49 ± 17.16 mm; <em>P</em> = .55). At 1-year follow-up, TLR rates were similar (26.6% vs 17.9%; <em>P</em> = .17), as were major adverse cardiovascular event rates (32.9% vs 35.0%; <em>P</em> = .86).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We observed no significant difference in 1-year and 3-year clinical outcomes compared to conventional plain balloon angioplasty. The trend toward higher TLR rates in the cutting/scoring balloon group warrants further investigation in larger, prospective studies. These findings suggest that lesion-specific factors, rather than balloon type alone, may be more important determinants of outcomes after IVBT for ISR.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions\",\"volume\":\"4 9\",\"pages\":\"Article 103858\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772930325013006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772930325013006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景冠状动脉血管内近距离放射治疗(IVBT)仍然是治疗复发性支架内再狭窄(ISR)的有效方法。然而,放射治疗前的最佳病变准备技术仍不明确。本研究评估了在病变准备后采用普通球囊血管成形术或切割/评分球囊血管成形术的临床结果。方法回顾性分析2016年6月至2024年1月在休斯顿卫理公会医院接受血管近距离治疗的219例冠状动脉ISR患者。根据用于病变准备的球囊类型对患者进行分层:普通球囊(n = 140)或切割/评分球囊(n = 79)。主要终点是1年的靶病变血运重建术(TLR)。次要终点包括主要不良心血管事件、支架血栓形成和出血并发症。结果各组间基线人口统计学特征相似,除切割/穿刺球囊组年龄较大外(67.0±11.0岁vs 64.0±10.3岁;P = 0.047)。病变长度具有可比性(28.01±18.62 vs 26.49±17.16 mm; P = 0.55)。在1年随访中,TLR率相似(26.6% vs 17.9%, P = 0.17),主要不良心血管事件发生率相似(32.9% vs 35.0%, P = 0.86)。结论与常规球囊血管成形术相比,我们观察到1年和3年的临床结果无显著差异。切割/穿刺球囊组TLR率较高的趋势值得在更大规模的前瞻性研究中进一步调查。这些发现表明,病变特异性因素,而不是单独的球囊类型,可能是IVBT治疗ISR后结果的更重要决定因素。
Lesion Preparation Before Coronary Intravascular Brachytherapy: A Comparison of Plain Balloon Versus Cutting/Scoring Balloon Angioplasty
Background
Coronary intravascular brachytherapy (IVBT) has remained as an effective treatment for recurrent in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, optimal lesion preparation techniques prior to radiation delivery remain undefined. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of IVBT after lesion preparation with either plain balloon angioplasty or cutting/scoring balloon angioplasty.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective analysis of 219 patients who underwent vascular brachytherapy for coronary ISR between June 2016 and January 2024 at the Houston Methodist Hospital. Patients were stratified based on the type of balloon used for lesion preparation: plain balloon (n = 140) or cutting/scoring balloon (n = 79). The primary end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1 year. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiovascular events, stent thrombosis, and bleeding complications.
Results
Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for older age in the cutting/scoring balloon group (67.0 ± 11.0 vs 64.0 ± 10.3 years; P = .047). Lesion length was comparable (28.01 ± 18.62 vs 26.49 ± 17.16 mm; P = .55). At 1-year follow-up, TLR rates were similar (26.6% vs 17.9%; P = .17), as were major adverse cardiovascular event rates (32.9% vs 35.0%; P = .86).
Conclusions
We observed no significant difference in 1-year and 3-year clinical outcomes compared to conventional plain balloon angioplasty. The trend toward higher TLR rates in the cutting/scoring balloon group warrants further investigation in larger, prospective studies. These findings suggest that lesion-specific factors, rather than balloon type alone, may be more important determinants of outcomes after IVBT for ISR.