Skip to main content
Log in

Treatment of large de novo coronary lesions with paclitaxel-coated balloon only: results from a Chinese institute

Clinical Research in Cardiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

To evaluate the efficacy of paclitaxel-coated balloons (SeQuent Please®) for large de novo coronary lesions with diameters greater than 2.8 mm.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of 527 consecutive patients with 595 de novo lesions (222 lesions) that comprised the large vessel disease (LVD) group, with a reference diameter (RD) ≥ 2.8 mm; the other 373 lesions comprised the small vessel disease (SVD) group, with a RD < 2.8 mm who received drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty at the Beijing Hospital, Beijing, China. Sixty-eight patients with 91 lesions, including 45 LVD lesions, underwent coronary angiography at an average 10.7 months after DCB intervention. Clinical characteristics were recorded, and coronary angiograms were analysed with Quantitative Coronary Angiography (QCA) software.

Results

The patients in the LVD group were much younger than those in the small vessel group (61.7 ± 11.3 vs. 63.8 ± 11.7, P = 0.003), and fewer LVD patients had diabetes (27.0 vs. 57.8%, P = 0.001), three-vessel disease (37.5 vs. 52.6%, P = 0.003) and complex lesions (37.8 vs. 48.8%, P = 0.009) than those in the SVD group. Lesion preparations for LVD were more complicated than for SVD, such as 40.1% of lesions required the additional use of a cutting or scoring balloon (P = 0.004), and 21.2% lesions required non-compliant (NC) balloons (P < 0.001). Coronary dissections occurred in 63(28.3%) lesions in the LVD group but bail-out drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation was required only in one lesion (0.5%), which were both comparable with those in the SVD group. The success rate of DCB intervention was quite high and also similar in the LVD group and SVD group (99.5 vs. 99.7%, P > 0.05). QCA analysis showed that the follow-up minimal lumen diameter (MLD) was significantly increased compared with the MLD immediately post angioplasty both in the SVD group (1.75 ± 0.48 vs. 1.58 ± 0.31 mm, P = 0.008) and the LVD group (2.26 ± 0.66 vs. 2.09 ± 0.40 mm, P = 0.067). At an average of 10.1 months of clinical follow-up, the major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rate was 0% in the LVD group and 1.4% in the SVD group, with target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates of 0% and 1.1%, respectively. No death was observed in either group.

Conclusions

DCB for de novo coronary lesions with diameters greater than 2.8 mm was as safe and effective as for small vessel lesions, suggesting that the DCB-only strategy is also feasible in large de novo lesions intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Varenhorst C, Lindholm M, Sarno G, Olivecrona G, Jensen U, Nilsson J, Carlsson J, James S, Lagerqvist B (2018) Stent thrombosis rates the first year and beyond with new- and old-generation drug-eluting stents compared to bare metal stents. Clin Res Cardiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-018-1252-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Lee SY, Hong MK, Shin DH, Kim JS, Kim BK, Ko YG, Choi D, Jang Y, Kim HS, Valgimigli M, Palmerini T, Stone GW (2017) Clinical outcomes of dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents in patients with different cardiovascular risk factors. Clin Res Cardiol 106:165–173

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, Collet JP, Cremer J, Falk V et al (2014) 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European society of cardiology (ESC) and the European association for cardio-thoracic surgery (EACTS) Developed with the special contribution of the European association of percutaneous cardiovascular interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J 35:2541–2619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Latib A, Colombo A, Castriota F, Micari A, Cremonesi A, De Felice F et al (2012) A randomized multicenter study comparing a paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon with a paclitaxel-eluting stent in small coronary vessels: the BELLO (Balloon Elution and Late Loss Optimization) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 60:2473–2480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Unverdorben M, Kleber FX, Heuer H, Figulla HR, Vallbracht C, Leschke M, Cremers B, Hardt S, Buerke M, Ackermann H, Boxberger M, Degenhardt R, Scheller B (2013) Treatment of small coronary arteries with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter in the PEPCAD I study: are lesions clinically stable from 12 to 36 months? EuroIntervention 9:620–628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cortese B, Micheli A, Picchi A, Coppolaro A, Bandinelli L, Severi S, Limbruno U (2010) Paclitaxel-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent during PCI of small coronary vessels, a prospective randomised clinical trial. The PICCOLETO study. Heart 96:1291–1296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kleber FX, Mathey DG, Rittger H, Scheller B (2011) How to use the drug-eluting balloon: recommendations by the German consensus group. EuroIntervention 7(Suppl K):K125–K128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Clinical use of drug-coated balloon: recommendations by the Chinese consensus group (2016). Chin J Intervent Cardiol 24:61–67 (in Chinese)

  9. Funatsu A, Nakamura S, Inoue N, Nanto S, Nakamura M, Iwabuchi M, Ando K, Asano R, Habara S, Saito S, Kozuma K, Mitsudo K (2017) A multicenter randomized comparison of paclitaxel-coated balloon with plain balloon angioplasty in patients with small vessel disease. Clin Res Cardiol 106:824–832

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Holmes DR, Holubkov R, Vlietstra RE, Kelsey SF, Reeder GS, Dorros G, Williams DO, Cowley MJ, Faxon DP, Kent KM (1988) Comparison of complications during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty from 1977 to 1981 and from 1985 to 1986: the national heart, lung, and blood institute percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 12:1149–1155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Huber MS, Mooney JF, Madison J, Mooney MR (1991) Use of a morphologic classification to predict clinical outcome after dissection from coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 68:467–471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hermans WR, Rensing BJ, Foley DP, Deckers JW, Rutsch W, Emanuelsson H, Danchin N, Wijns W, Chappuis F, Serruys PW (1992) Therapeutic dissection after successful coronary balloon angioplasty: no influence on restenosis or on clinical outcome in 693 patients. The MERCATOR Study Group (Multicenter European Research Trial with Cilazapril after Angioplasty to prevent Transluminal Coronary Obstruction and Restenosis). J Am Coll Cardiol 20:767–780

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bourassa MG, Lesperance J, Eastwood C, Schwartz L, Cote G, Kazim F, Hudon G (1991) Clinical, physiologic, anatomic and procedural factors predictive of restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 18:368–376

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sinaga DA, Ho HH, Zeymer U, Waliszewski M, Jafary FH, Ooi YW, Loh JK, Tan JK, Ong PJ (2015) Drug coated balloon angioplasty in elderly patients with small vessel coronary disease. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis 9:389–396

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Waksman R, Serra A, Loh JP, Malik FT, Torguson R, Stahnke S, von Strandmann RP, Rodriguez AE (2013) Drug-coated balloons for de novo coronary lesions: results from the Valentines II trial. EuroIntervention 9:613–619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kleber FX, Rittger H, Ludwig J, Schulz A, Mathey DG, Boxberger M, Degenhardt R, Scheller B, Strasser RH (2016) Drug eluting balloons as stand alone procedure for coronary bifurcational lesions: results of the randomized multicenter PEPCAD-BIF trial. Clin Res Cardiol 105:613–621

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kleber FX, Schulz A, Waliszewski M, Hauschild T, Bohm M, Dietz U, Cremers B, Scheller B, Clever YP (2015) Local paclitaxel induces late lumen enlargement in coronary arteries after balloon angioplasty. Clin Res Cardiol 104:217–225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Xue Y, Xinyue W, Wenduo Z, Bing L, Dan L, Fucheng S, Fusui J (2016) Study of efficacy and safety of paclitaxel drug coated balloon in elderly patients with de novo coronary disease. Chin J Geriatr 35:834–838 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Poerner TC, Duderstadt C, Goebel B et al (2017) Fractional flow reserve-guided coronary angioplasty using paclitaxel-coated balloons without stent implantation: feasibility, safety and 6-month results by angiography and optical coherence tomography. Clin Res Cardiol 106:18–27

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gould KL, Lipscomb K (1974) Effects of coronary stenoses on coronary flow reserve and resistance. Am J Cardiol 34:48–55

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pastormerlo LE, Ciardetti M, Trianni G, Ravani M, Shlueter M, Vaghetti M, Coceani M, Rizza A, Berti S, Palmieri C (2014) Drug eluting balloon: a multipurpose tool for coronary revascularization with optimal long-term follow-up results. J Interv Cardiol 27:574–579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Scheller B, Hehrlein C, Bocksch W, Rutsch W, Haghi D, Dietz U, Bohm M, Speck U (2006) Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter. N Engl J Med 355:2113–2124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Scheller B, Hehrlein C, Bocksch W, Rutsch W, Haghi D, Dietz U, Böhm M, Speck U (2008) Two year follow-up after treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter. Clin Res Cardiol 97:773–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Unverdorben M, Kleber FX, Heuer H, Figulla HR, Vallbracht C, Leschke M, Cremers B, Hardt S, Buerke M, Ackermann H, Boxberger M, Degenhardt R, Scheller B (2010) Treatment of small coronary arteries with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter. Clin Res Cardiol 99:165–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to acknowledge Tong Xu, Yin Lin and Bo Xia for patient data recording and QCA analysis. This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (No. 2017ZX09304026) and the Capital Characteristic Clinical Application Research and Achievement Promotion Funding Project (No. Z161100000516054).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Fusui Ji or Fang Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, X., Ji, F., Xu, F. et al. Treatment of large de novo coronary lesions with paclitaxel-coated balloon only: results from a Chinese institute. Clin Res Cardiol 108, 234–243 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-018-1346-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-018-1346-8

Keywords

Navigation