Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Stent coverage and neointimal proliferation in bare metal stents postdilated with a Paclitaxel-eluting balloon versus everolimus-eluting stents: prospective randomized study using optical coherence tomography at 6-month follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In this randomized trial, strut coverage and neointimal proliferation of a therapy of bare metal stents (BMSs) postdilated with the paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon (DEB) was compared with everolimus drug-eluting stents (DESs) at 6-month follow-up using optical coherence tomography. We hypothesized sufficient stent coverage at follow-up.

METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 105 lesions in 90 patients were treated with either XIENCE V DES (n=51) or BMS postdilated with the SeQuent Please DEB (n=54). At follow-up, comparable results on the primary optical coherence tomography end point (percentage uncovered struts 5.64±9.65% in BMS+DEB versus 4.93±9.29% in DES; P=0.366) were found. Thus, BMS+DEB achieved the prespecified noninferiority margin of 5% uncovered struts versus DES (difference between treatment means, 0.71%; one-sided upper 95% confidence interval, 4.14%; noninferiority P=0.04). Optical coherence tomography analysis showed significantly more global neointimal proliferation in the BMS+DEB group (15.7±7.8 versus 11.0±5.2 mm(3) proliferation volume/cm stent length; P=0.002). No significant focal in-stent stenosis analyzed with angiography (percentage diameter stenosis at follow-up, 22.8±11.9 versus 16.9±10.4; P=0.014) and optical coherence tomography (peak local area stenosis, 39.5±13.8% versus 36.8±15.6%; P=0.409) was found.

CONCLUSIONS: Good stent strut coverage of >94% was found in both therapy groups. Despite greater suppression of global neointimal growth in DES, both DES and BMS+DEB effectively prevented clinically relevant focal restenosis at 6-month follow-up.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01056744.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app