TY - JOUR
T1 - A 2-year follow-up of a randomized multicenter study comparing a paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon with a paclitaxel-eluting stent in small coronary vessels the BELLO study
AU - Naganuma, Toru
AU - Latib, Azeem
AU - Sgueglia, Gregory A.
AU - Menozzi, Alberto
AU - Castriota, Fausto
AU - Micari, Antonio
AU - Cremonesi, Alberto
AU - De Felice, Francesco
AU - Marchese, Alfredo
AU - Tespili, Maurizio
AU - Presbitero, Patrizia
AU - Panoulas, Vasileios F.
AU - Buffoli, Francesca
AU - Tamburino, Corrado
AU - Varbella, Ferdinando
AU - Colombo, Antonio
N1 - Funding Information:
The BELLO study was supported by an unrestricted grant from the Invatec SpA , who had no role in the design, conduct, or reporting of the study. Industry had no role in the preparation, review, or approval of this manuscript. Dr. Latib serves on a Medtronic advisory board. Dr. Cremonesi is a consultant for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Varbella has received research grants from Medtronic , Boston Scientific , Abbott Vascular , Terumo , Sanitex , Sorin , Empass , MeDi , Kardia , St. Jude Medical Foundation , the Medicine Company , and Eli Lilly & Company . The other authors have reported that they have no relationships to disclose relevant to the contents of this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Background/objectives: A prospective, multi-center, randomized trial, BELLO (Balloon Elution and Late Loss Optimization), showed that the primary endpoint of in-stent (in-balloon) late loss was significantly less with drug-eluting balloons (DEB) as compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). At 6 months, DEB and PES were associated with similar rates of angiographic restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as death, myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization. The aim of this study was to report 2-year clinical outcomes after treatment of de novo small vessel disease with DEB as compared with PES. Methods: A total of 182 patients were enrolled and randomized to treatment with DEB (n=90) in 94 lesions or PES (n= 92) in 98 lesions. The study endpoint was the incidence of MACE at 2-year follow-up. Results: Two-year follow-up was achieved in almost all cases (97.8% in DEB group vs. 98.9% in PES group). There was a trend towards a lower incidence of MACE in the DEB group as compared with the PES group (14.8% vs. 25.3%; p= 0.08). TLR rates in the DEB group were acceptable at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years and did not differ significantly from the PES group (4.4% vs. 7.6%, p =0.37; 6.7% vs. 12.1%, p =0.23; 6.8% vs. 12.1%, p =0.25, respectively). Conclusions: Our results suggest that treatment of small vessel disease with a paclitaxel DEB is associated with a trend for improved clinical outcomes as compared with PES up to 2 years. Late catch-up phenomenon requiring repeat intervention after treatment with DEB was not evident in this study.
AB - Background/objectives: A prospective, multi-center, randomized trial, BELLO (Balloon Elution and Late Loss Optimization), showed that the primary endpoint of in-stent (in-balloon) late loss was significantly less with drug-eluting balloons (DEB) as compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). At 6 months, DEB and PES were associated with similar rates of angiographic restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as death, myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization. The aim of this study was to report 2-year clinical outcomes after treatment of de novo small vessel disease with DEB as compared with PES. Methods: A total of 182 patients were enrolled and randomized to treatment with DEB (n=90) in 94 lesions or PES (n= 92) in 98 lesions. The study endpoint was the incidence of MACE at 2-year follow-up. Results: Two-year follow-up was achieved in almost all cases (97.8% in DEB group vs. 98.9% in PES group). There was a trend towards a lower incidence of MACE in the DEB group as compared with the PES group (14.8% vs. 25.3%; p= 0.08). TLR rates in the DEB group were acceptable at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years and did not differ significantly from the PES group (4.4% vs. 7.6%, p =0.37; 6.7% vs. 12.1%, p =0.23; 6.8% vs. 12.1%, p =0.25, respectively). Conclusions: Our results suggest that treatment of small vessel disease with a paclitaxel DEB is associated with a trend for improved clinical outcomes as compared with PES up to 2 years. Late catch-up phenomenon requiring repeat intervention after treatment with DEB was not evident in this study.
KW - Drug-eluting balloon
KW - Paclitaxel-eluting stents
KW - Randomized controlled trial
KW - Small vessel disease
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933555696&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84933555696&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.080
DO - 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.080
M3 - Article
C2 - 25705005
AN - SCOPUS:84933555696
SN - 0167-5273
VL - 184
SP - 17
EP - 21
JO - International Journal of Cardiology
JF - International Journal of Cardiology
IS - 1
ER -