What is Better for Predilatation in Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation: a Non-compliant or a Compliant Balloon?

Overview

Journal Anatol J Cardiol

Publisher Kare Publishing

Specialty Cardiology & Vascular Diseases

Date 2015 Dec 8

PMID 26642470

Citations 5

Authors

Erdem Ozel

Ahmet Tastan

Ali Ozturk

Emin Evren Ozcan

Samet Uyar

Omer Senarslan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: The bioresorbable vascular scaffold system (BVS) is a fully absorbable vascular treatment system. In this study, we aimed to compare the periprocedural effectiveness and long term results of non-compliant balloon (NCB) and compliant balloon (CB) systems, which are used for predilatation before BVS implantation.

Methods: One hundred forty-six BVS-treated lesions from 119 patients were retrospectively analyzed in the study. Patients with acute coronary syndrome, stable angina and silent ischemia were included in the study. Lesions and patients were categorized into the NCB and CB groups according to the type of balloon used for predilatation. NCB was implemented on 72 lesions (59 patients) and CB was implemented on 74 lesions (60 patients). The two groups were compared on terms of procedural features and both in-hospital and 1-year clinical follow-up results. Chi-square and independent sample t test were performed for statistical analysis.

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of patient characteristics and lesion properties. The number of postdilated lesions was significantly higher in the CB group. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume were significantly lower in the NCB group. At follow-up, one patient had myocardial infarction in the CB group because of scaffold thrombosis and no mortality was observed.

Conclusion: Predilatation with NCB before BVS implantation reduces the need for postdilatation. In addition, use of NCB reduces the procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume but had no effect on 1 year clinical follow-up results compared with CB.

Citing Articles

Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study.

Pradhan A, Vishwakarma P, Bhandari M, Sethi R, Chandra S, Chaudhary G Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(23).

PMID: 36498303 PMC: 9738498. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192316231.

The use of semi-compliant versus non-compliant balloon systems for predilatation during the implantation of self-expandable transcatheter aortic valves: Data from the VIenna CardioThOracic Aortic Valve RegistrY (VICTORY).

Mach M, Szalkiewicz P, Poschner T, Hasan W, Andreas M, Winkler B Eur J Clin Invest. 2021; 51(9):e13570.

PMID: 33954997 PMC: 8459263. DOI: 10.1111/eci.13570.

Author`s Reply.

Ozel E Anatol J Cardiol. 2017; 17(1):75-76.

PMID: 28144009 PMC: 5324869.

Balloon postdilatation is a mandatory step in the deployment of bioresorbable vascular scaffold.

Karabulut A Anatol J Cardiol. 2017; 17(1):75.

PMID: 28144008 PMC: 5324868. DOI: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2017.7551.

Procedural and one-year clinical outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of chronic total occlusions: a single-centre experience.

Ozel E, Tastan A, Ozturk A, Ozcan E, Kilicaslan B, Ozdogan O Cardiovasc J Afr. 2016; 27(6):345-349.

PMID: 27078224 PMC: 5408394. DOI: 10.5830/CVJA-2016-033.

References

Baim D, Flatley M, Caputo R, OShaughnessy C, Low R, Fanelli C . Comparison of PRE-dilatation vs direct stenting in coronary treatment using the Medtronic AVE S670 Coronary Stent System (the PREDICT trial). Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88(12):1364-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(01)02114-2. View

Gomez-Lara J, Diletti R, Brugaletta S, Onuma Y, Farooq V, Thuesen L . Angiographic maximal luminal diameter and appropriate deployment of the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold as assessed by optical coherence tomography: an ABSORB cohort B trial sub-study. EuroIntervention. 2011; 8(2):214-24. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV8I2A35. View

Gomez-Lara J, Garcia-Garcia H, Onuma Y, Garg S, Regar E, De Bruyne B . A comparison of the conformability of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds to metal platform coronary stents. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010; 3(11):1190-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.07.016. View

Zueco J, Lopez-Minguez J, Moreu J, Calvo I, Ramirez J, Alonso M . Direct coronary stenting versus stenting with balloon pre-dilation: immediate and follow-up results of a multicentre, prospective, randomized study. The DISCO trial. DIrect Stenting of COronary Arteries. Eur Heart J. 2002; 23(8):633-40. DOI: 10.1053/euhj.2001.2893. View

Serruys P, Chevalier B, Dudek D, Cequier A, Carrie D, Iniguez A . A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1-year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes.... Lancet. 2014; 385(9962):43-54. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61455-0. View

Ballarino M, Moreyra Jr E, Damonte A, Sampaolesi A, Woodfield S, Pacheco G . Multicenter randomized comparison of direct vs. conventional stenting: the DIRECTO trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003; 58(4):434-40. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.10404. View

Onuma Y, Serruys P, Ormiston J, Regar E, Webster M, Thuesen L . Three-year results of clinical follow-up after a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold in patients with de novo coronary artery disease: the ABSORB trial. EuroIntervention. 2010; 6(4):447-53. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ30V6I4A76. View

Serruys P, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia H, Muramatsu T, van Geuns R, De Bruyne B . Dynamics of vessel wall changes following the implantation of the absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. EuroIntervention. 2013; 9(11):1271-84. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV9I11A217. View

Costopoulos C, Latib A, Naganuma T, Miyazaki T, Sato K, Figini F . Comparison of early clinical outcomes between ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold and everolimus-eluting stent implantation in a real-world population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 85(1):E10-5. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.25569. View

10.

Capodanno D, Gori T, Nef H, Latib A, Mehilli J, Lesiak M . Percutaneous coronary intervention with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in routine clinical practice: early and midterm outcomes from the European multicentre GHOST-EU registry. EuroIntervention. 2014; 10(10):1144-53. DOI: 10.4244/EIJY14M07_11. View

11.

Mattesini A, Secco G, DallAra G, Ghione M, Rama-Merchan J, Lupi A . ABSORB biodegradable stents versus second-generation metal stents: a comparison study of 100 complex lesions treated under OCT guidance. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 7(7):741-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.165. View

12.

Farooq V, Gomez-Lara J, Brugaletta S, Gogas B, Garcia-Garcia H, Onuma Y . Proximal and distal maximal luminal diameters as a guide to appropriate deployment of the ABSORB everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a sub-study of the ABSORB Cohort B and the on-going ABSORB EXTEND Single Arm Study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012; 79(6):880-8. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.23177. View

13.

Attizzani G, Ohno Y, Capranzano P, La Manna A, Francaviglia B, Grasso C . Initial experience of percutaneous coronary intervention in bifurcations with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds using different techniques--insights from optical coherence tomography. Int J Cardiol. 2013; 170(2):e33-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.10.078. View

14.

Allahwala U, Cockburn J, Shaw E, Figtree G, Hansen P, Bhindi R . Clinical utility of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the optimisation of Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold deployment during percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2014; 10(10):1154-9. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV10I10A190. View

15.

Ormiston J, Serruys P, Regar E, Dudek D, Thuesen L, Webster M . A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent system for patients with single de-novo coronary artery lesions (ABSORB): a prospective open-label trial. Lancet. 2008; 371(9616):899-907. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60415-8. View

16.

Ielasi A, Saino A, Silvestro A, Personeni D, Tespili M . Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation for recurrent in-stent restenosis: an option in case of multiple failures?. EuroIntervention. 2014; 10(3):337. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV10I3A57. View