Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical outcomes of drug-eluting balloon for treatment of small coronary artery in patients with acute myocardial infarction

  • IM - ORIGINAL
  • Published:
Internal and Emergency Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There were good clinical outcomes of drug-eluting balloon (DEB) use in de novo lesions and in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions. However, few studies focused on DEB use in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The aim of this study was to retrospective evaluate the efficacy of DEB for patients of AMI with de novo small coronary artery disease. Between March 2016 and March 2018, patients of AMI with de novo small coronary artery (reference diameter 2.0–2.8 mm) and received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled. 268 patients were divided into DEB group (PCI with further DEB, n = 56) and drug-eluting stent (DES) group (PCI with further DES, n = 212). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE; all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization and target vessel revascularization) at 24 months. A subset of patients underwent angiographic follow-up. Clinical characteristics were balanced in the two groups. Mean reference vessel diameter was similar between the DEB and DES groups (2.64 ± 0.17 mm vs 2.65 ± 0.14 mm, P = 0.625). The 24-month MACE rates were 17.5% in DEB group and 16.4% in DES group (P = 0.853). Stent thrombosis was seen in three patients (1.46%) in DES group. There was no vessel thrombosis noted in the DEB group. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 35.71% of DEB group and 27.25% of DES group. Late lumen loss was similar between the two groups (DEB 0.14 ± 0.13 mm, DES 0.19 ± 0.12 mm, P = 0.442). DEB is a reasonable strategy for AMI with small coronary artery. Compared with DES, DEB is an alternative strategy which had similar 24-month clinical outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ismail MD, Ahmad WAW, Leschke M, Waliszewski M, Boxberger M, Abidin IZ et al (2016) The outcomes of patients with very small coronary artery disease treated with thin strut cobalt chromium bare metal stents: an observational study. Springerplus 5(1):1668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mohiaddin H, Wong TD, Burke-Gaffney A, Bogle RG (2018) Drug-coated balloon-only percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Cardiol Ther 7:127–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Worthley S, Hendriks R, Worthley M, Whelan A, Walters D, Whitbourn R et al (2015) Paclitaxel-eluting balloon and everolimus-eluting stent for provisional stenting of coronary bifurcations: 12-month results of the multicenter BIOLUX-I study. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 16:413–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Besic KM, Strozzi M, Margetic E, Bulum J, Kolaric B (2015) Drug-eluting balloons in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. J Cardiol 65:203–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Baan J, Claessen BE, Dijk KB, Vendrik J, van der Schaaf RJ, Meuwissen M et al (2018) A randomized comparison of paclitaxel-eluting balloon versus everolimus-eluting stent for the treatment of any in-stent restenosis. The DARE trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv 11:275–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kufner S, Cassese S, Valeskini M, Neumann F, Schulz-Schüpke S, Hoppmann P et al (2015) Long-term efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-eluting balloon for the treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis 3-year results of a randomized controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv 8:877–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Alfonso F, Pérez-Vizcayno MJ, Cuesta J, del Blanco BG, García-Touchard A, López-Mínguez JR et al (2018) 3-Year clinical follow-up of the ribs iv clinical trial: a prospective randomized study of drug-eluting balloons versus everolimus eluting stents in patients with in-stent restenosis in coronary arteries previously treated with drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv 11:981–991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Latib A, Colombo A, Castriota F, Micari A, Cremonesi A, Felice F et al (2012) A randomized multicenter study comparing a paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon with a paclitaxel-eluting stent in small coronary vessels. The BELLO (Balloon Elution and Late Loss Optimization) study. JACC 60(24):2473–2480

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Giannini F, Latib A, Jabbour RJ, Costopoulos C, Chieffo A, Carlino M et al (2017) Comparison of paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon and paclitaxel-eluting stent in small coronary vessels in diabetic and nondiabetic patients—results from the BELLO (balloon elution and late loss optimization) trial. Cardiovasc Revascul Med 18(1):4–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sinaga DA, Ho HH, Watson TJ, Sim A, Nyein TT, Jafary FH et al (2016) Drug-coated balloons: a safe and effective alternative to drug-eluting stents in small vessel coronary artery disease. J Interv Cardiol 29(5):454–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tan Q, Wang QS, Liu DT, Zhang SY, Zhang Y, Li Y (2015) Intravascular ultrasound-guided unprotected left main coronary artery stenting in the elderly. Saudi Med J 36(5):549–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Picard F, Doucet S, Asgar AW (2017) Contemporary use of drug-coated balloons in coronary artery disease: where are we now? Arch Cardiovasc Dis 110(4):259–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U et al (2019) 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. EuroIntervention 14(14):1435–1534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cortese B, Micheli A, Picchi A, Coppolaro A, Bandinelli L, Severi S et al (2010) Paclitaxel-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent during PCI of small coronary vessels, a prospective randomised clinical trial. The PICCOLETO study. Heart 96(16):1291–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sim HW, Ananthakrishna R, Chan SP, Low AF, Lee CH, Chan MY et al (2018) Treatment of very small de novo coronary artery disease with 2.0 mm drug-coated balloons showed 1-year clinical outcome comparable with 2.0 mm drug-eluting stents. J Invasive Cardiol 30(7):256–261

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Belkacemi A, Agostoni P, Nathoe HM, Voskuil M, Shao C, Van Belle E et al (2012) First results of the DEBAMI (drug eluting balloon in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) trial: a multicentre randomized comparison of drug-eluting balloon plus bare-metal stent versus bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in primary percutaneous coronary intervention with 6-month angiographic, intravascular, functional, and clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 59:2327–2337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fang CY, Fang HY, Chen CJ, Yang CH, Wu CJ, Lee WC (2018) Comparison of clinical outcomes after drug-eluting balloon and drugeluting stent use for in-stent restenosis related acute myocardial infarction: a retrospective study. PeerJ 15(6):e4646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Vos NS, Fagel ND, Amoroso G, Herrman JR, Patterson MS, Piers LH et al (2019) Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty versus drug-eluting stent in acute myocardial infarction: the REVELATION randomized trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 12(17):1691–1699

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by Hebei medical technology project (20171252) and Qinhuangdao technology supporting project (201801B032).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, Qinhuangdao First Hospital, Hebei Medical University, No. 258 of Wenhua Road, Qinhuangdao, 066000, Hebei Province, China

    Qiang Tan, Qingsheng Wang, Hongmei Yang, Zhang Jing & Chen Ming

Authors
  1. Qiang Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qingsheng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hongmei Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhang Jing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chen Ming
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiang Tan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest statement.

Statement of human and animal rights

This study was approved by the ethics committee of Qinhuangdao First Hospital. This study was carried out conforming to the principles expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tan, Q., Wang, Q., Yang, H. et al. Clinical outcomes of drug-eluting balloon for treatment of small coronary artery in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Intern Emerg Med 16, 913–918 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-020-02530-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-020-02530-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation