Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Atherectomy and Specialty Balloons in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

  • Coronary Artery Disease (D Feldman and V Voudris, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of review

Interventional cardiologists are increasingly being called upon to perform complex revascularization in patients who are deemed not to be candidates for surgical revascularization and, until recently, many of these patients would have only been offered medical management. Further, changing demographics have resulted in an increasingly elderly and frail population with diabetes and chronic kidney disease being referred for revascularization. Owing to the increasing prevalence of coronary artery calcification and the importance of achieving complete revascularization, advanced tools and techniques are required to safely revascularize this patient population.

Recent findings

Coronary artery calcification is a marker for increased periprocedural complications and worse long-term outcomes in percutaneous intervention. Its presence may mandate advanced revascularization strategies to facilitate safe revascularization. Several studies have highlighted the importance of intracoronary imaging and there have been iterative changes and new devices that have been developed that can facilitate revascularization in the setting of significant coronary artery calcification.

Summary

Successful coronary revascularization is increasingly dependent on the rational use of intraavascular imaging, specialized balloons and atherectomy to overcome complex coronary artery disease and calcification. A rational strategy for the safe use of advanced techniques and tools is presented here.

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 and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Généreux P, Madhavan MV, Mintz GS, Maehara A, Palmerini T, Lasalle L, et al. Ischemic outcomes after coronary intervention of calcified vessels in acute coronary syndromes: pooled analysis from the HORIZONS-AMI (harmonizing outcomes with revascularization and stents in acute myocardial infarction) and ACUITY (acute catheterization). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1845–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mintz GS, Popma JJ, Pichard AD, Kent KM, Satler LF, Chuang YC, et al. Patterns of calcification in coronary artery disease: a statistical analysis of intravascular ultrasound and coronary angiography in 1155 lesions. Circulation [Internet]. 1995 [cited 2018 Oct 28];91:1959–65. Available from: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/01.CIR.91.7.1959

  3. Dattilo PB, Prasad A, Honeycutt E, Wang TY, Messenger JC. Contemporary patterns of fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound use among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: insights from the national cardiovascular data registry. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. Elsevier Inc.; 2012;60:2337–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kang SJ, Mintz GS, Park DW, Lee SW, Kim YH, Lee CW, et al. Mechanisms of in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation intravascular ultrasound analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:9–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fujii K, Carlier SG, Mintz GS, Yang YM, Moussa I, Weisz G, Dangas G, Mehran R, Lansky AJ, Kreps EM, Collins M, Stone GW, Moses JW, Leon MB Stent underexpansion and residual reference segment stenosis are related to stent thrombosis after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: an intravascular ultrasound study. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. Elsevier Masson SAS; 2005;45:995–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2004.12.066

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Song HG, Kang SJ, Ahn JM, Kim WJ, Lee JY, Park DW, et al. Intravascular ultrasound assessment of optimal stent area to prevent in-stent restenosis after zotarolimus-, everolimus-, and sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;83:873–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. •• Zhang J, Gao X, Kan J, Ge Z, Han L, Lu S, et al. Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided implantation of drug-eluting stent in all-comers: the ULTIMATE trial. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. American College of Cardiology Foundation; 2018; Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S073510971838433X. Randomized trial demonstrating 46% relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events with the use of intravascular ultrasound all-comers undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

  8. Ahn JM, Kang SJ, Yoon SH, Park HW, Kang SM, Lee JY, et al. Meta-analysis of outcomes after intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation in 26,503 patients enrolled in three randomized trials and 14 observational studies. Am J Cardiol [Internet]. Elsevier Inc.; 2014;113:1338–47. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.12.043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ali ZA, Maehara A, Généreux P, Shlofmitz RA, Fabbiocchi F, Nazif TM, et al. Optical coherence tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound and with angiography to guide coronary stent implantation (ILUMIEN III: OPTIMIZE PCI): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2618–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mintz GS, Pichard AD, Kent KM, Satler LF, Popma JJ, Leon MB. Interrelation of coronary angiographic reference lumen size and intravascular ultrasound target lesion calcium. Am J Cardiol. 1998;81:387–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee D, Wiernek S, Prashant K, Rossi J. Inpatient utilization of coronary optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound: findings from the national inpatient sample. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91:S23–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Smilowitz NR, Mohananey D, Razzouk L, Weisz G, Slater JN. Impact and trends of intravascular imaging in diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in inpatients in the United States. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2018;92(6):E410-E415. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.27673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kurbaan AS, Kelly PA, Sigwart U. Cutting balloon angioplasty and stenting for aorto-ostial lesions. Heart. 1997;77:350–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mauri L, Bonan R, Weiner BH, Legrand V, Bassand JP, Popma JJ, et al. Cutting balloon angioplasty for the prevention of restenosis: results of the Cutting Balloon Global Randomized Trial. Am J Cardiol. 2002;90:1079–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chung C-M, Nakamura S, Tanaka K, Tanigawa J, Kitano K, Akiyama T, et al. Comparison of cutting balloon vs stenting alone in small branch ostial lesions of native coronary arteries. Circ J Off J Japanese Circ Soc [Internet]. 2003;67:21–5. Available from: http://ezproxy.deakin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mdc&AN=12520146&site=ehost-live&scope=site

  16. de Ribamar Costa J, Mintz GS, Carlier SG, Mehran R, Teirstein P, Sano K, et al. Nonrandomized comparison of coronary stenting under intravascular ultrasound guidance of direct stenting without predilation versus conventional predilation with a semi-compliant balloon versus predilation with a new scoring balloon. Am J Cardiol [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2018 Nov 2];100:812–7. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002914907010454

  17. Schmidt T, Hansen S, Meincke F, Frerker C, Kuck KH, Bergmann MW. Safety and efficacy of lesion preparation with the AngioSculpt Scoring Balloon in left main interventions: the ALSTER Left Main registry. EuroIntervention. 2016;11:1346–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Takano M, Yamamoto M, Murakami D, Takano H, Asai K, Yasutake M, et al. Optical coherence tomography after new scoring balloon angioplasty for in-stent restenosis and de novo coronary lesions. Int J Cardiol [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2018 Nov 2];141:e51–3. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S016752730801317X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Scheller B, Fontaine T, Mangner N, Hoffmann S, Bonaventura K, Clever YP, et al. A novel drug-coated scoring balloon for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: results from the multi-center randomized controlled PATENT-C first in human trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:51–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. di Palma G, Cortese B. Novel paclitaxel-coated scoring ballon for de novo complex coronary lesions-first report. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med [internet]. Elsevier Inc.; 2018;19:390–2. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2017.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Prati F, Di Mario C, Moussa I, Reimers B, Mallus MT, Parma A, et al. In-stent neointimal proliferation correlates with the amount of residual plaque burden outside the stent: an intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation [Internet]. 1999 [cited 2018 Nov 3];99:1011–4. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10051293.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bittl JA, Chew DP, Topol EJ, Kong DF, Califf RM. Meta-Analysis of randomized trials of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus atherectomy, cutting balloon atherotomy, or laser angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2018 Nov 3];43:936–42. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15028347.

  23. Moussa I, Ellis SG, Jones M, Kereiakes DJ, McMartin D, Rutherford B, et al. Impact of coronary culprit lesion calcium in patients undergoing paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation (a TAXUS-IV sub study). Am J Cardiol [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2018 Nov 3];96:1242–7. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002914905012634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kawamoto H, Latib A, Ruparelia N, Boccuzzi GG, Pennacchi M, Sardella G, et al. Planned versus provisional rotational atherectomy for severe calcified coronary lesions: insights from the ROTATE multi-center registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:881–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Abdel-Wahab M, Richardt G, Joachim Büttner H, Toelg R, Geist V, Meinertz T, et al. High-speed rotational atherectomy before paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in complex calcified coronary lesions: the randomized ROTAXUS (Rotational Atherectomy Prior to Taxus Stent Treatment for Complex Native Coronary Artery Disease) trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2018 Nov 3];6:10–9. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S193687981201000X

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Armstrong EJ, Stanislawski MA, Kokkinidis DG, Plomondon ME, Barón AE, Giri J, et al. Coronary atherectomy is associated with improved procedural and clinical outcomes among patients with calcified coronary lesions: insights from the VA CART program. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91:1009–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sakakura K, Inohara T, Kohsaka S, Amano T, Uemura S, Ishii H, et al. Incidence and determinants of complications in rotational atherectomy: insights from the national clinical data (J-PCI Registry). Circ Cardiovasc Interv [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Nov 3];9. Available from: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004278

  28. • Abdel-Wahab M, Toelg R, Byrne RA, Geist V, El-Mawardy M, Allali A, et al. High-speed rotational atherectomy versus modified balloons prior to drug-eluting stent implantation in severely calcified coronary lesions. Circ Cardiovasc Interv [Internet]. 2018;11:1–12. Available from: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007415 Randomized trial of cutting/scoring balloon or rotational atherectomy. Higher procedural success with atherectomy, but no difference in late lumen loss or clinical outcomes at 9 months post procedure.

  29. Chambers JW, Diage T. Evaluation of the Diamondback 360 Coronary Orbital Atherectomy System for treating de novo, severely calcified lesions. Expert Rev Med Devices [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 Nov 4];11:457–66. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/17434440.2014.929493

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Kini AS, Vengrenyuk Y, Pena J, Motoyama S, Feig JE, Meelu OA, et al. Optical coherence tomography assessment of the mechanistic effects of rotational and orbital atherectomy in severely calcified coronary lesions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Nov 4];86:1024–32. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/ccd.26000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sotomi Y, Shlofmitz RA, Colombo A, Serruys PW, Onuma Y. Patient selection and procedural considerations for coronary orbital atherectomy system. Interv Cardiol (London, England) [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Nov 4];11:33–8. Available from: https://www.radcliffecardiology.com/articles/patient-selection-and-procedural-considerations-coronary-orbital-atherectomy-system

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lee MS, Gordin JS, Stone GW, Sharma SK, Saito S, Mahmud E, et al. Orbital and rotational atherectomy during percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery calcification. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;92:61–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lee M, Généreux P, Shlofmitz R, Phillipson D, Anose BM, Martinsen BJ, et al. Orbital atherectomy for treating de novo, severely calcified coronary lesions: 3-year results of the pivotal ORBIT II trial. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med. 2017;18:261–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lee MS, Shlofmitz E, Kong J, Srivastava PK, Al Yaseen S, Sosa FA, et al. Outcomes of patients with severely calcified aorto-ostial coronary lesions who underwent orbital atherectomy. J Interv Cardiol [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 4];31:15–20. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/joic.12432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Koifman E, Garcia-Garcia HM, Kuku KO, Kajita AH, Buchanan KD, Steinvil A, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of orbital and rotational atherectomy in calcified narrowings in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2018;121:934–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Meraj PM, Shlofmitz E, Kaplan B, Jauhar R, Doshi R. Clinical outcomes of atherectomy prior to percutaneous coronary intervention: a comparison of outcomes following rotational versus orbital atherectomy (COAP-PCI study). J Interv Cardiol. 2018;31:478–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Safian RD, Feldman T, Muller DW, Mason D, Schreiber T, Haik B, et al. Coronary angioplasty and Rotablator atherectomy trial (CARAT): immediate and late results of a prospective multicenter randomized trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv [Internet]. 2001 [cited 2018 Nov 3];53:213–20. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/ccd.1151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Whitlow PL, Bass TA, Kipperman RM, Sharaf BL, Ho KKL, Cutlip DE, et al. Results of the study to determine rotablator and transluminal angioplasty strategy (STRATAS). Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:699–705.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Megaly M, Sandoval Y, Lillyblad MP, Brilakis ES. Aminophylline for preventing bradyarrhythmias during orbital or rotational atherectomy of the right coronary artery. J Invasive Cardiol [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 3];30:186–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29440624.

  40. Ali ZA, Brinton TJ, Hill JM, Maehara A, Matsumura M, Karimi Galougahi K, et al. Optical coherence tomography characterization of coronary lithoplasty for treatment of calcified lesions: first description. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10:897–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Brinton TJ. Lithoplasty for treatment of calcified coronary disease the results of the DISRUPT CAD study. EuroPCR 2017.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Y3543 Bergen Cardiac Care Centre St. Boniface Hospital Winnipeg, Manitoba, R2H 2A6, Canada

    David W. Allen MD, FRCPC

  2. Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory, Piedmont Heart Institute, 95 Collier Road, Suite 2065, Atlanta, Georgia, 30309, USA

    Prashant Kaul MD, FACC, FSCAI

Authors
  1. David W. Allen MD, FRCPC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prashant Kaul MD, FACC, FSCAI
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David W. Allen MD, FRCPC.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

David W. Allen declares no potential conflicts of interest. Prashant Kaul reports personal fees from Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. and Boston Scientific.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Coronary Artery Disease

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Allen, D.W., Kaul, P. Atherectomy and Specialty Balloons in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 21, 13 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-019-0717-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-019-0717-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation