Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels
Background: The optimal therapeutic strategy for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels (<2.5 mm.) remains controversial and challenging. Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the 12 months outcome of scoring balloon (SB) versus drug-eluting balloon (DEB) in very small (<...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Indian College of Cardiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.joicc.org/article.asp?issn=1561-8811;year=2021;volume=11;issue=3;spage=127;epage=132;aulast=Metwally |
| _version_ | 1797321548227411968 |
|---|---|
| author | Yasser Gaber Metwally Khaled Y Elnady |
| author_facet | Yasser Gaber Metwally Khaled Y Elnady |
| author_sort | Yasser Gaber Metwally |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: The optimal therapeutic strategy for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels (<2.5 mm.) remains controversial and challenging. Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the 12 months outcome of scoring balloon (SB) versus drug-eluting balloon (DEB) in very small (<2.5 mm) coronary interventions. Patients and Methods: Seventy-seven patients referred for coronary intervention with reference vessel diameter <2.5 mm were assigned to either SB or DEB. The primary endpoint was target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 12 months follow-up. Results: Out of 77 patients enrolled, 37.7% were assigned to SB, while 62.3% were assigned to DEB. Sever dissection rate was significantly higher among the DEB group (0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.048); while TVR rate was significantly lower among the SB group (0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.048). Similarly, the target vessel-related myocardial infarction rate was significantly lower among the SB group (0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.048). On the other hand, there were no significant differences in the rates of deaths or restenosis between the two groups. Conclusion and Recommendations: SB is superior to the DEB with better both safety and efficacy for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels (<2.5 mm). Larger scaled prospective multicenter randomized trials are needed for confirming our favorable results of using SB for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels <2.5 mm. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-08T05:00:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-31ad7da2a671493dbba397800e41b666 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1561-8811 2213-3615 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-08T05:00:10Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Indian College of Cardiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-31ad7da2a671493dbba397800e41b6662024-02-07T12:56:13ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Indian College of Cardiology1561-88112213-36152021-01-0111312713210.4103/JICC.JICC_59_20Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vesselsYasser Gaber MetwallyKhaled Y ElnadyBackground: The optimal therapeutic strategy for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels (<2.5 mm.) remains controversial and challenging. Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the 12 months outcome of scoring balloon (SB) versus drug-eluting balloon (DEB) in very small (<2.5 mm) coronary interventions. Patients and Methods: Seventy-seven patients referred for coronary intervention with reference vessel diameter <2.5 mm were assigned to either SB or DEB. The primary endpoint was target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 12 months follow-up. Results: Out of 77 patients enrolled, 37.7% were assigned to SB, while 62.3% were assigned to DEB. Sever dissection rate was significantly higher among the DEB group (0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.048); while TVR rate was significantly lower among the SB group (0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.048). Similarly, the target vessel-related myocardial infarction rate was significantly lower among the SB group (0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.048). On the other hand, there were no significant differences in the rates of deaths or restenosis between the two groups. Conclusion and Recommendations: SB is superior to the DEB with better both safety and efficacy for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels (<2.5 mm). Larger scaled prospective multicenter randomized trials are needed for confirming our favorable results of using SB for coronary intervention in very small coronary vessels <2.5 mm.http://www.joicc.org/article.asp?issn=1561-8811;year=2021;volume=11;issue=3;spage=127;epage=132;aulast=Metwallyelutingscoring balloonsmall coronary |
| spellingShingle | Yasser Gaber Metwally Khaled Y Elnady Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels Journal of Indian College of Cardiology eluting scoring balloon small coronary |
| title | Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels |
| title_full | Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels |
| title_fullStr | Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels |
| title_full_unstemmed | Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels |
| title_short | Scoring balloon versus drug-eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels |
| title_sort | scoring balloon versus drug eluting balloon in coronary intervention for very small coronary vessels |
| topic | eluting scoring balloon small coronary |
| url | http://www.joicc.org/article.asp?issn=1561-8811;year=2021;volume=11;issue=3;spage=127;epage=132;aulast=Metwally |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yassergabermetwally scoringballoonversusdrugelutingballoonincoronaryinterventionforverysmallcoronaryvessels AT khaledyelnady scoringballoonversusdrugelutingballoonincoronaryinterventionforverysmallcoronaryvessels |