J 2018

Long-term outcomes after treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis with paclitaxel-coated balloon catheters or everolimus-eluting stents: 3-year follow-up of the TIS clinical study

PLEVA, Leos, Pavel KUKLA, Jana ZAPLETALOVA and Ota HLINOMAZ

Basic information

Original name

Long-term outcomes after treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis with paclitaxel-coated balloon catheters or everolimus-eluting stents: 3-year follow-up of the TIS clinical study

Authors

PLEVA, Leos (203 Czech Republic, guarantor), Pavel KUKLA (203 Czech Republic), Jana ZAPLETALOVA (203 Czech Republic) and Ota HLINOMAZ (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution)

Edition

Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, Hoboken, Wiley-Blackwell, 2018, 1522-1946

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Článek v odborném periodiku

Field of Study

30201 Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Country of publisher

United States of America

Confidentiality degree

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Impact factor

Impact factor: 2.551

RIV identification code

RIV/00216224:14110/18:00105325

Organization unit

Faculty of Medicine

DOI

UT WoS

000451188300007

Keywords in English

everolimus-eluting stent; in-stent restenosis; paclitaxel-eluting balloon

Tags

Tags

International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 10/2/2019 15:37, Soňa Böhmová

Abstract

V originále

Background The efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheters (PEB) and drug-eluting stents for treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis (BMS-ISR) have been demonstrated in several studies with follow-up times of 9 to 12 months; however, the long-term outcomes of ISR treatment are less defined. Objectives Methods We aimed to compare the long-term efficacy of PEB and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for the treatment of BMS-ISR. We analyzed 3-year clinical follow-up data from patients included in the TIS randomized clinical study. A total of 136 patients with BMS-ISR were allocated to receive treatment with either PEB or EES (68 patients with 74 ISR lesions per group). Results Conclusions The PEB and EES groups did not significantly differ in major adverse cardiac events-free survival (MACE; P = .211; including individual events: CV death: P = .622; myocardial infarction: P = .650 or target vessel revascularization: P = .286) at 3-year clinical follow-up. No event-free survival differences were found between the groups regarding overall mortality (P = .818), definite stent thrombosis (P = .165) or the second MACE (P = .270). At the 3-year follow-up, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between iopromide-coated PEB and EES for the treatment of BMS-ISR. (; ; NCT01735825).