Objective: Our study sought to compare the 12-month clinical outcome of patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) vs. sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) during coronary angioplasty. Background: Drug-coated balloons represent an established therapeutic tool for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). A comparison between PCB and SCB is still lacking. Methods: We performed an indirect comparison between two cohorts of patients previously included into two investigator-driven registries with clinical primary endpoints, 494 treated with the Elutax SV PCB (AR Baltic, Lithuania) from the DCB RISE registry, and 596 treated with the Magic Touch SCB (Concept Medical, India) from the EASTBOURNE registry. The primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 12-month clinical follow-up. Results: After propensity score matching, a total of 580 patients were well matched for baseline clinical and procedural characteristics and were analyzed. At 12 months there was no significant difference between the matched DCB RISE and EASTBOURNE cohorts in terms of the primary endpoint MACE (10.3% DCB RISE vs. 10.7% EASTBOURNE, p = 0.892). No significant difference was observed also regarding the rate of TLR (7.9% DCB RISE vs. 8.3% EASTBOURNE; p = 0.879, respectively). By multivariate analysis, insulin-dependent diabetes was the only predictor of MACE. Conclusions: In the SIRPAC study, the first indirect comparison between paclitaxel-coated and sirolimus coated balloons, no significant difference in clinical endpoints were found at 12-month follow-up. Randomized studies are necessary to confirm these findings.
Comparison Between Sirolimus- and Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon for Revascularization of Coronary Arteries: The SIRPAC (SIRolimus-PAClitaxel) Study
De Rosa S.
2021-01-01
Abstract
Objective: Our study sought to compare the 12-month clinical outcome of patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) vs. sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) during coronary angioplasty. Background: Drug-coated balloons represent an established therapeutic tool for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). A comparison between PCB and SCB is still lacking. Methods: We performed an indirect comparison between two cohorts of patients previously included into two investigator-driven registries with clinical primary endpoints, 494 treated with the Elutax SV PCB (AR Baltic, Lithuania) from the DCB RISE registry, and 596 treated with the Magic Touch SCB (Concept Medical, India) from the EASTBOURNE registry. The primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 12-month clinical follow-up. Results: After propensity score matching, a total of 580 patients were well matched for baseline clinical and procedural characteristics and were analyzed. At 12 months there was no significant difference between the matched DCB RISE and EASTBOURNE cohorts in terms of the primary endpoint MACE (10.3% DCB RISE vs. 10.7% EASTBOURNE, p = 0.892). No significant difference was observed also regarding the rate of TLR (7.9% DCB RISE vs. 8.3% EASTBOURNE; p = 0.879, respectively). By multivariate analysis, insulin-dependent diabetes was the only predictor of MACE. Conclusions: In the SIRPAC study, the first indirect comparison between paclitaxel-coated and sirolimus coated balloons, no significant difference in clinical endpoints were found at 12-month follow-up. Randomized studies are necessary to confirm these findings.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
