Title of article
A Randomized Comparison of Drug-Eluting Balloon Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Bare-Metal Stent–In-Stent Restenosis: The RIBS V Clinical Trial (Restenosis Intra-stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon vs. Everolimus-elutin
Author/Authors
Alfonso، نويسنده , , Fernando and Pérez-Vizcayno، نويسنده , , Maria Jose and Cلrdenas، نويسنده , , Alberto and Garcيa del Blanco، نويسنده , , Bruno and Seidelberger، نويسنده , , Bernhard and Iٌiguez، نويسنده , , Andrés and Gَmez-Recio، نويسنده , , Manuel and Masotti، نويسنده , , Mَnica and Velلzquez، نويسنده , , M. Teresa and Sanchيs، نويسنده , , Juan and Garcيa-Touchard، نويسنده , , Arturo and Zueco، نويسنده , , Javier and Bethencourt، نويسنده , , Armando and Melgares، نويسنده , , Rafael and Cequier، نويسنده , , Angel and Dominguez-Melcَn، نويسنده , , Antonio and Mainar، نويسنده , , Vicente and Lَpez-Mيnguez، نويسنده , , José R. and Moreu، نويسنده , , José and Martي، نويسنده , , Vicens and Moreno، نويسنده , , Raْl and Jiménez-Quevedo، نويسنده , , Pilar and Gonzalo، نويسنده , , Nieves and Fernلndez، نويسنده , , Cristina and Macaya، نويسنده , , Carlos، نويسنده ,
Issue Information
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2014
Pages
9
From page
1378
To page
1386
Abstract
Objectives
tudy sought to compare the efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) with that of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with bare-metal stents (BMS) in-stent restenosis (ISR).
ound
ent of patients with ISR remains a challenge.
s
as a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial comparing DEB with EES in patients with bare-metal stents (BMS) in-stent restenosis (ISR). The primary endpoint was the minimal lumen diameter at 9 monthsʹ follow-up.
s
l of 189 patients with BMS-ISR from 25 Spanish sites were included (95 were allocated to DEB and 94 to EES). Procedural success was achieved in all patients. At late angiography (median 249 days; 92% of eligible patients), patients in the EES arm had a significantly larger minimal lumen diameter (2.36 ± 0.6 mm vs. 2.01 ± 0.6 mm, p < 0.001; absolute mean difference: 0.35 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16 to 0.53) and a lower percent of diameter stenosis (13 ± 17% vs. 25 ± 20%, p < 0.001). However, late loss (0.04 ± 0.5 mm vs. 0.14 ± 0.5 mm, p = 0.14) and binary restenosis rate (4.7% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.22) were very low and similar in both groups. Clinical follow-up (median 365 days) was obtained in all (100%) patients. Occurrences of the combined clinical outcome measure (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization; 6% vs. 8%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.26 to 2.18, p = 0.6) and the need for target vessel revascularization (2% vs. 6%; HR: 0.32: 95% CI: 0.07 to 1.59, p = 0.17) were similar in the 2 groups.
sions
ients with BMS-ISR, both DEB and EES provided excellent clinical results with a very low rate of clinical and angiographic recurrences. However, compared with DEB, EES provide superior late angiographic findings. (Restenosis Intra-stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon vs. Everolimus-eluting Stent [RIBS V]; NCT01239953)
Keywords
drug-eluting balloon , In-stent restenosis , device thrombosis , everolimus-eluting stent
Journal title
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Serial Year
2014
Journal title
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Record number
1758303
Link To Document