Key result
A paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon-only strategy for STEMI resulted in 6-month late-luminal loss of 0.51 mm, comparable to bare metal stents (P=0.44) but inferior to paclitaxel-eluting stents (P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does a paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon only strategy improve angiographic outcomes compared to BMS, DEB+BMS, or PES in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI?
Cohort (n=40)
Does a paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon only strategy improve angiographic outcomes compared to BMS, DEB+BMS, or PES in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.51% vs 0.74%
p-value: p=0.44
PPCI by DEB-only yielded angiographic outcomes comparable to BMS alone and DEB followed by BMS, but was inferior to PES, suggesting it as a potential alternative for patients with contraindications to drug-eluting stents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
DEB-only appears feasible without thrombosis in selected STEMI; leaves open randomized comparison to contemporary DES.
Nijhoff et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (n=40). Paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon (DEB) only strategy vs. Bare metal stent (BMS) alone, DEB followed by BMS, and paclitaxel eluting stent (PES) was evaluated on 6-month angiographic in-balloon/stent late-luminal loss (LLL) (p=0.44). A paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon-only strategy for STEMI resulted in 6-month late-luminal loss of 0.51 mm, comparable to bare metal stents (P=0.44) but inferior to paclitaxel-eluting stents (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: