Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Drug-Eluting Balloons and Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Small Coronary Artery Disease
10.3904/kjm.2024.99.5.253
- Author:
Man Su KIM
1
;
Seong Ho PARK
;
Seok OH
;
Dae Yong HYUN
;
Seung Hun LEE
;
Yong Hwan LIM
;
Jun Ho AHN
;
Kyung Hoon CHO
;
Min Chul KIM
;
Doo Sun SIM
;
Young Joon HONG
;
Ju Han KIM
;
Youngkeun AHN
;
Myung Ho JEONG
Author Information
1. Cardiovascular Center, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, Korea
- Publication Type:1
- From:Korean Journal of Medicine
2024;99(5):253-262
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
Background/Aims:Drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) represent a novel therapeutic approach for patients with small coronary artery disease. However, further studies are needed to compare the clinical efficacy of DEBs versus drug-eluting stents (DESs).
Methods:In total, 492 patients (age, 67.9 ± 11.0 years; 339 men) with small coronary artery lesions (diameter < 2.75 mm) were randomly assigned to group I (DEB) (n = 104; age, 67.2 ± 10.7 years; 83 men) and group II (DES) (n = 388; age, 68.0 ± 11.1 years; 254 men). For inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis, the study population was stratified into groups I (n = 269) and II (n = 280). We compared the incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between the two groups during 12 months of clinical follow-up.
Results:Group I had shorter device lengths (22.4 ± 5.8 mm) compared with group II (27.4 ± 9.3 mm; p < 0.001). Additionally, devices in group I were smaller in diameter (2.4 ± 0.1 mm) compared with those in group II (2.6 ± 0.1 mm; p < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was lower in group I (53.8% ± 12.6%) than in group II (58.6% ± 11.9%; p < 0.001). After IPTW, no significant differences in LVEF were observed between groups I and II. During 12 months of follow-up, the incidence of total MACE did not differ between the two groups.
Conclusions:No significant differences were observed in clinical efficacy between DEB and DES for the treatment of small coronary artery disease. Therefore, DEB can be considered a viable alternative to DES in patients with small coronary artery disease.
