Outcomes after drug‐coated balloon treatment for patients with calcified coronary lesions. (20th December 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ito, Ryuta; Ueno, Katsumi; Yoshida, Tamami; Takahashi, Hiroshi; Tatsumi, Tomohiko; Hashimoto, Yasumasa; Kojima, Yoshinobu; Kitamura, Tomoya; Morita, Norihiko
• Is Part Of: Journal of interventional cardiology. Volume 31:Number 4(2018:Aug.)
• Page Start: 436
• Page End: 441
• Publication Date: 2017-12-20
• Subjects: calcified coronary lesions -- drug‐coated balloon; Cardiology -- Periodicals; Heart -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.1206
• DOI: 10.1111/joic.12484
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0896-4327

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: To investigate the efficacy of drug‐coated balloon (DCB) for calcified coronary lesions. Background: Calcified coronary lesions is associated with poor clinical outcomes after revascularization. Recently, DCB is emerging as an alternative strategy for de novo coronary lesions. However, reports describing the efficacy of DCB for calcified coronary lesions are limited. Methods: A total of 81 patients (96 lesions) who electively underwent DCB treatment for de novo coronary lesions were enrolled: 46 patients (55 lesions) in the calcified group and 35 patients (41 lesions) in the non‐calcified group. Angiographic follow‐up data and clinical outcomes after the procedure were evaluated. Results: The diameter of the DCB used was 2.5 ± 0.5 mm. No bail‐out stenting was observed after DCB treatment. Rotational atherectomy was used in 82% of lesions in the calcified group. Follow‐up angiography (median, 6.5 months after intervention) was performed for 59 patients (30 in the calcified group and 29 in the non‐calcified group). Late lumen loss and rates of restenosis were comparable between the groups (0.03 mm in the calcified group vs −0.18 mm in the non‐calcified group, P = 0.093 and 13.9% vs 3.03%, P = 0.095, respectively). The survival rates for target lesion revascularization free survival and major adverse cardiac events at 2 years were comparable between the groups (85.3% vs 93.4%, P = 0.64 and 81.4% vs 88.5%, P = 0.57, respectively). Conclusion: Calcified coronary lesions might dilute the effect of DCB. However, clinical outcomes in the calcified group were similar to those in the non‐calcified group.