Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon Catheter Research Articles

Pressure-responsive pH-triggered layer-by-layer coating of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters for instant high-dose drug delivery for percutaneous coronary artery intervention

Pressure-responsive pH-triggered layer-by-layer coating of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters for instant high-dose drug delivery for percutaneous coronary artery intervention

TCT-431 Comparison of the Efficacy of Sirolimus and Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Catheters in the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The TIS-2 Study.

TCT-431 Comparison of the Efficacy of Sirolimus and Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Catheters in the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The TIS-2 Study.

In-stent restenosis treatment with seal-wing paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters

CĂ­l: CĂ­lem tĂŠto studie je srovnĂĄnĂ­ dlouhodobĂ˝ch klinickĂ˝ch vĂ˝sledkĹŻ léčby restenĂłz v holĂ˝ch kovovĂ˝ch stentech (BMS-ISR) pomocĂ­ seal-wing a iopromidovĂ˝ch lĂŠkovĂ˝ch balonkovĂ˝ch katĂŠtrĹŻ s paclitaxelem (PEB). Metodika: Celkem bylo po dobu tří let roky klinicky sledovĂĄno 132 pacientĹŻ s BMS-ISR, z nichĹž 64 bylo léčeno pomocĂ­ seal-wing PEB; kontrolnĂ­ skupinu tvořilo 68 pacientĹŻ z iopromidovĂŠ PEB větve předchozĂ­ studie TIS. PrimĂĄrnĂ­m cĂ­lovĂ˝m ukazatelem byla četnost vĂ˝skytu zĂĄvaĹžnĂ˝ch neŞådoucĂ­ch kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂ­ch příhod (MACE; ĂşmrtĂ­ z kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂ­ch příčin, infarkt myokardu [IM] nebo nutnost opakovanĂŠ revaskularizace cĂ­lovĂŠ tepny [TVR]) VĂ˝sledky: VĂ˝skyt MACE byl po třech letech signifikantně vyĹĄĹĄĂ­ ve skupině pacientĹŻ léčenĂ˝ch seal-wing PEB oproti skupině iopromidovĂ˝ch PEB (40,6 % vs. 19,1%; p = 0,008); obdobnĂŠho rozdĂ­lu bylo dosaĹženo ve srovnĂĄnĂ­ nutnosti TVR (26,9 % vs. 8,8 %; p = 0,011). Doba přeĹžitĂ­ bez klinickĂŠ příhody byla ve skupině iopromidovĂ˝ch PEB signifikantně delĹĄĂ­ (p = 0,021). Mezi oběma skupinami nebyly zaznamenĂĄny rozdĂ­ly v mortalitě z kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂ­ch příčin (4,7 % vs. 5,9 %; p = 1,000), vĂ˝skytu IM (6,3 % vs. 4,4 %; p = 0,712), potvrzenĂŠ trombĂłzy stentĹŻ (0 % vs. 2,9 %; p = 0,497) nebo opakovanĂ˝ch MACE (4,7 % vs. 1,5 %; p = 0,354). ZĂĄvěr: Ve srovnĂĄnĂ­ s iopromidovĂ˝mi PEB je pouĹžitĂ­ seal-wing PEB v léčbě BMS-ISR spojeno se signifikantně vyĹĄĹĄĂ­m tříletĂ˝m vĂ˝skytem MACE a TVR (ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01735825). © 2021, ČKS.

Long-Term Follow-Up of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Catheter.

Drug-eluting balloons currently constitute a therapeutic tool used in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Long-term results remain unknown. We evaluated the prognosis of PCI using a second generation paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB) in real-world patients. We included all PCI with PEB in de novo or in-stent restenosis coronary lesions performed in our unit from March 2009 to March 2019. We assessed the composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) rate after a median follow-up of 42 months. Consecutive patients (n = 320) with 386 lesions were included; 46.9% presented with stable angina and 53.1% acute coronary syndromes; 52.6% of the lesions were in-stent restenosis and 47.3% de novo lesions with a mean diameter of 2.4 ± 0.5 mm. A bare metal stent was implanted in 6.7% and a drug-eluting stent in 8.5% of patients. The MACE rate was 8%: 10 (2.6%) cardiovascular deaths, 13 (3.4%) myocardial infarctions, and 16 (4.1%) target lesion revascularization. The all-cause death rate was 5.2%. No cases of thrombosis were recorded. In conclusion, PEB was a safe and effective tool to treat in-stent restenosis and de novo coronary lesions, especially small vessel disease, during long-term follow-up.

TCT-265 Comparison of long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention with Sequent Please® versus In-Pact Falcon® paclitaxel eluting balloon catheter.

Paclitaxel coated balloons (PCB) currently constitute one of the therapeutic tools used in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Sequent Please® (SPB) and In-Pact Falcon® (IFB) are PCB widely used that differ in several features such as the drug carrier. Their results at a long-term follow-up

Efficacy of a seal-wing paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters in the treatment of bare metal stent restenosis

BackgroundOur study aimed to compare the efficacy of seal-wing paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters (PEB) with iopromide-coated PEB and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for treating bare metal stent restenosis (BMS-ISR).MethodsWe enrolled 64 patients with 69 BMS-ISR. The control group comprised patients from the iopromide-PEB and EES arms of a previous TIS study. The primary end-point was 12-month in-segment late lumen loss (LLL). Secondary end-points included incidence of binary in-stent restenosis and 12-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE).ResultsCompared to iopromide-coated PEB, seal-wing PEB was associated with significantly higher 12-month LLL (0.30 vs. 0.02 mm; p < 0.0001), repeated binary restenosis (28.12% vs. 8.7%; p = 0.012), 12-month MACE (26.98% vs. 10.29%; p = 0.003), and target vessel revascularization (TVR; 20.63% vs. 7.35%; p = 0.009).Compared to EES, no significant differences were found in the 12-month LLL (0.30 vs. 0.19 mm; p = 1.000), repeated binary restenosis (28.12% vs. 19.12%; p = 0.666), 12-month MACE (26.98% vs. 19.12%; p = 0.102) or TVR (20.63% vs. 16.18%; p = 0.360).ConclusionBMS-ISR treatment using seal-wing PEB led to significantly higher 12-month LLL, repeated binary restenosis, MACE, and TVR compared to iopromide-coated PEB. However, no significant differences were found in comparison with EES.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01735825

PMD42 - Economic evaluation of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) in Mexican Population with Peripheral Arterial Obstructive Disease

PMD42 - Economic evaluation of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) in Mexican Population with Peripheral Arterial Obstructive Disease

Unrestricted use of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter compared with drug-eluting stent for drug-eluting stent restenosis in routine clinical practice

Unrestricted use of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter compared with drug-eluting stent for drug-eluting stent restenosis in routine clinical practice

TCT-590 Efficacy of Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon Catheter in Patients with Recurrences after Drug-eluting Stent Implantation for In-stent Restenosis

TCT-590 Efficacy of Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon Catheter in Patients with Recurrences after Drug-eluting Stent Implantation for In-stent Restenosis

Two Cases of Percutaneous Intervention for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Anastomoses With Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Catheters

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) intervention, particularly anastomosis site intervention, is challenging for interventional cardiologists. A paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter (SeQuent Please) is a recently-introduced device capable of delivering paclitaxel homogeneously into the targeted vessel wall. We herein report our experience with two cases. In the first case, coronary angiography showed significant stenosis at the site of anastomosis between the saphenous vein graft and the left anterior descending artery (LAD). In the second case, coronary angiography showed significant stenosis at the site of anastomosis between the left internal mammary artery and the LAD. We performed percutaneous intervention of these CABG anastomoses using paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters, and obtained favorable angiographic and clinical outcomes.

A paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter (Sequent Please) may be more effective than a drug-eluting stent for the treatment of in-stent restenosis.

A paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter (Sequent Please) may be more effective than a drug-eluting stent for the treatment of in-stent restenosis.