Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: doi:10.22028/D291-38470
Volltext verfügbar? / Dokumentlieferung
Title: Drug-Coated Balloon for Small Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With and Without High-Bleeding Risk in the BASKET-SMALL 2 Trial
Author(s): Scheller, Bruno
Rissanen, Tuomas T.
Farah, Ahmed
Ohlow, Marc-Alexander
Mangner, Norman
Wöhrle, Jochen
Möbius-Winkler, Sven
Weilenmann, Daniel
Leibundgut, Gregor
Cuculi, Florim
Gilgen, Nicole
Coslovsky, Michael
Mahfoud, Felix
Jeger, Raban V.
Language: English
Title: Circulation : Cardiovascular interventions
Volume: 15
Issue: 4
Pages: 323-333
Publisher/Platform: American Heart Association
Year of Publication: 2022
Free key words: coronary vessels
drug-eluting stents
percutaneous coronary intervention
DDC notations: 610 Medicine and health
Publikation type: Journal Article
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Patients at high-bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention represent a challenging patient population. The use of drug-coated balloon (DCB) allows shorter duration of dual antiplatelet therapy compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) and reduces thrombotic risk due to the absence of a permanent implant. The present analysis aimed to investigate if the effect of DCB versus DES differed between patients with and without HBR treated with percutaneous coronary intervention in small coronary arteries. METHODS: This prespecified subgroup analysis of a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial included 758 patients with de novo lesions in coronary vessels <3 mm and an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention, randomized to DCB (n=382) or second-generation DES (n=376). Patients were followed over 3 years for major adverse cardiac events. RESULTS: Of the 758 patients randomized, 155 (20%) had HBR; these patients had higher mortality at 3 years (hazard ratio [95% CI], 3.09 [1.78–5.36]; P<0.001). Rates of major bleeding events were overall low but tended to be lower after DCB versus DES (1.6% versus 3.7%; P=0.064), were similar in patients with HBR (4.5% versus 3.4%) but less frequent in DCBversus DES-treated patients without HBR (0.9% versus 3.8%). There was no difference in major adverse cardiac events between DCB and DES regardless of bleeding risk (HBR, hazard ratio: 1.16 [0.51–2.62]; P=0.719 versus non-HBR, 0.96 [0.62–1.49]; P=0.863). CONCLUSIONS: DCBs were similarly safe and effective as current-generation DES in the treatment of coronary arteries <3 mm, regardless of bleeding risk. In patients treated with DCB, there was a trend towards a reduction of severe bleeding events at 3 years.
DOI of the first publication: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.011569
URL of the first publication:
Link to this record: urn:nbn:de:bsz:291--ds-384708
ISSN: 1941-7632
Date of registration: 8-Dec-2022
Description of the related object: Supplemental Material
Related object:
Faculty: M - Medizinische Fakultät
Department: M - Innere Medizin
Professorship: M - Prof. Dr. Michael Böhm
M - Prof. Dr. Bruno Scheller-Clever
Collections:SciDok - Der Wissenschaftsserver der Universität des Saarlandes

Files for this record:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in SciDok are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.