-
PDF
- Split View
-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
J Krefting, N Krueger, C Graesser, R Schmieder, F Starnecker, S Kufner, S Cassese, A Kastrati, H Schunkert, M Von Scheidt, J Wiebe, DigiMed Bayern, Comparative outcomes of drug-coated balloon angioplasty versus second-generation drug-eluting stent for in-stent restenosis: a real-world data analysis, European Heart Journal, Volume 45, Issue Supplement_1, October 2024, ehae666.1459, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.1459
- Share Icon Share
Abstract
Coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) poses a significant challenge in interventional cardiology, with optimal treatment strategies being the subject of ongoing debate. Current clinical guidelines offer a choice between drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCB) and repeat stenting with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), each with distinct implications for long-term patient outcomes.
The aim of this study is to compare 1-year outcomes between DCB angioplasty and second-generation DES in the treatment of ISR. Longitudinal real-world data are used from the OBSERVABLE database, which comprises German health claims data between 2012 and 2021.
A total of 10,440 ISR individuals undergoing DCB or DES intervention were identified. After exclusion of bare-metal stents, first generation stents and non-DCBs, 3,810 propensity score-matched individuals remained. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality and myocardial infraction (MI). Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, MI, and bleeding as a safety outcome.
At 1-year follow-up, the primary outcome of all-cause mortality and MI was observed in 246 individuals (12.9%) in the DES group, compared with 201 individuals (10.6%) in the DCB group (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06-1.53). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of these findings. Secondary outcomes revealed higher all-cause mortality in the DES group (7.9%) compared to the DCB group (6.3%) (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03-1.66), with no difference in MI. Bleeding events were comparable between the two treatments, with 244 individuals (12.8%) in the DES group and 206 individuals (10.8%) in the DCB group (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.89-1.53).
Author notes
Funding Acknowledgements: Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): DigiMed Bayern
- myocardium
- stents
- hemorrhage
- angioplasty
- follow-up
- safety
- mortality
- clinical practice guideline
- metallic stents
- drug-eluting stents
- restenosis, in-stent
- sensitivity analysis
- Interventional Cardiology
- patient-focused outcomes
- drug-coated balloon
- primary outcome measure
- composite outcomes
- data analysis