Search

The interventional treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) has undergone significant improvements thanks to technological innovations. Nowadays, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is the standard of care for the treatment of CAD. Nevertheless, the non-negligible incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and suboptimal results in various anatomical settings has led to the development of drug-coated balloons (DCBs). DCBs are catheter-based balloons whose surface is coated with an anti-proliferative drug (mainly Paclitaxel or Sirolimus) loaded onto the balloon surface with different technologies and dose concentrations. In the beginning, these devices were used for the treatment of ISR showing an excellent efficacy profile in the inhibition of intimal hyperplasia. Subsequently, several studies evaluated their use in other angiographical and clinical contexts such as de novo lesions, small vessel disease, diffuse coronary disease, bifurcation lesions, acute coronary syndromes, high-bleeding risk and diabetic patients. This comprehensive review aims to describe the main DCB platforms on the market, their fields of application with the main supporting studies and their future perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Lower extremity peripheral artery disease (LEPAD) frequently coexists with coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with multisite vascular disease (MVD). While percutaneous revascularization is well-established for both LEPAD and CAD, limited evidence exists for patients eligible for both procedures. Specifically, the feasibility of concomitant LEPAD and CAD percutaneous revascularization remains unknown. Objectives. To compare the efficacy and safety of concomitant coronary and lower extremity elective percutaneous revascularization. Methods. Between 2012 and 2021, we included 135 patients in an observational, retrospective single-center registry. The population was stratified into two groups: 45 patients (concomitant group) underwent simultaneous coronary and peripheral percutaneous interventions, and 90 patients (deferred group) underwent two separate procedures within one year. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at one year, while the primary safety endpoint was in-hospital contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). Results. Study groups were well-balanced in baseline characteristics. In terms of coronary features, the concomitant revascularization group more often underwent single-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), while the deferred group had multivessel PCI with diffuse coronary disease. No differences were detected in the number of LEPAD lesions between groups. For the primary efficacy endpoint, the incidence of MACE at one year was 37.8% in the concomitant group vs. 34.4% in the deferred group (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.64–2.10; p = 0.61). No significant differences were found in CIN occurrence between the concomitant and deferred groups (11.1% vs. 8.9%; OR 1.30; 95% CI 0.36–4.21; p = 0.68). Conclusions. Multisite vascular disease patients eligible for CAD and LEPAD percutaneous revascularization exhibited a high cardiovascular risk profile with diffuse multivessel coronary and lower extremity disease. Our study suggests the efficacy and safety of concomitant coronary and lower extremity percutaneous revascularization based on one-year MACE incidence and in-hospital CIN. However, dedicated studies are warranted to confirm the short- and long-term outcomes of the concomitant revascularization strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last few decades, endovascular revascularization techniques have revolutionized the treatment of peripheral artery disease, offering a less invasive alternative to surgery. However, the successful treatment of heavily calcified lesions is often compromised by various vascular complications, including recoils, dissections, and the need for target vessel reinterventions. This has prompted the development of several tools for lesion preparation, with the aim of achieving better procedural outcomes. This review aims to summarize the main characteristics and current evidence related to the available devices for preparing severely calcified peripheral lesions.

Background: Periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) according to the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) criteria has prognostic relevance among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it is unclear whether the type of cardiac biomarker used for the diagnosis of periprocedural MI plays a role in terms of event frequency and outcomes., Objectives: To compare the characteristics of SCAI periprocedural MI based on creatine kinase-myocardial band fraction (CK-MB) vs. high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) in patients undergoing elective PCI., Methods and Results: Between 2017 and 2021, periprocedural MI was assessed in a prospective study. The primary clinical outcome of interest was all-cause death at 1-year follow-up. A total of 1010 patients undergoing elective PCI were included. SCAI periprocedural MI based on CK-MB vs. hs-cTnI occurred in 1.8 and 13.5% of patients, respectively. hs-cTnI periprocedural MI in the absence of concomitant CK-MB criteria was associated with lower rates of ancillary criteria, including angiographic, ECG, and cardiac imaging criteria. At 1-year follow-up, periprocedural MI defined by CK-MB (adjusted hazard ratio, HR, 4.27, 95% confidence intervals, CI, 1.23-14.8; P = 0.022) but not hs-cTnI (adjusted HR 2.04, 95% CI 0.94-4.45; P = 0.072) was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death. Hs-cTnI periprocedural MI was not predictive of death unless accompanied by CK-MB criteria (adjusted HR 4.64, 95% CI 1.32-16.31; P = 0.017)., Conclusion: In the setting of elective PCI, using hs-cTn instead of CK-MB resulted in a substantial increase in SCAI periprocedural MI events, which were not prognostically relevant in the absence of concurrent CK-MB elevations., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)