Paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of patients with in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis of angiographic and clinical data.

Abstract

Paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) have become attractive alternative treatment options for patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR); however, the safety and efficacy of PCBs in comparison with those of conventional therapies are less well defined. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of PCBs for patients with ISR using comparisons with control groups. Electronic databases, such as MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were searched, and eligible studies that compared PCBs with uncoated balloons (UCBs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs) in patients with ISR were considered. Subgroup analyses were performed with different control groups. Nine studies (1,488 patients, 1,608 lesions) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with patients who underwent UCB angioplasty, those who underwent PCB angioplasty exhibited a clear superiority in late lumen loss (LLL) [weighted mean difference (WMD), -0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), (-0.59)-(-0.34); P<0.00001] and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) [odds ratio (OR), 0.21; 95% CI, 0.13-0.33; P<0.00001]. The OR for myocardial infarction (MI) (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.15-1.47; P=0.19) did not reach statistical significance. PCBs were associated with similar outcomes when compared with DESs with regard to LLL (WMD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.18-0.10; P=0.57), MACEs (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.36-1.53; P=0.42) and the ORs for all endpoints, including total mortality, target lesion revascularization, MI, stent thrombosis and binary restenosis, and no statistically significant differences were found. This meta-analysis showed that PCBs are associated with superior outcomes when compared with UCBs in the management of ISR, and are at least as efficacious and as well tolerated as DESs.