Cutting balloon angioplasty vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in patients receiving intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

Panayotis Fasseas, James L. Orford, Ryan Lennon, Jessica O'Neill, Ali E. Denktas, Carmelo J. Panetta, Peter B. Berger, David Holmes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis prior to intracoronary brachytherapy (ICB). Cutting balloon angioplasty may reduce the incidence of uncontrolled dissection requiring adjunctive stenting and may limit "melon seeding" and geographic miss in patients with in-stent restenosis who are subsequently treated with ICB. We performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 134 consecutive patients with in-stent restenosis who were treated with ICB preceded by either CBA or conventional balloon angioplasty. We identified 44 patients who underwent CBA and ICB, and 90 control patients who underwent conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and ICB for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Adjunctive coronary stenting was performed in 13 patients (29.5%) in the CBA/ICB group and 41 patients (45.6%; P < 0.001) in the PTCA/ICB group. There was no difference in the injury length or active treatment (ICB) length. The procedural and angiographic success rates were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent angina pectoris, subsequent target lumen revascularization, or the composite endpoint of all four clinical outcomes (P > 0.05). Despite sound theoretical reasons why CBA may be better than conventional balloon angioplasty for treatment of in-stent restenosis with ICB, and despite a reduction in the need for adjunctive coronary stenting, we were unable to identify differences in clinical outcome.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)152-157
Number of pages6
JournalCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume63
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2004

Fingerprint

Balloon Angioplasty
Brachytherapy
Stents
Therapeutics
Cucurbitaceae
Coronary Balloon Angioplasty
Dissection
Safety
Incidence

Keywords

  • Angioplasty
  • Brachytherapy
  • Cutting balloon
  • Restenosis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Cutting balloon angioplasty vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in patients receiving intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. / Fasseas, Panayotis; Orford, James L.; Lennon, Ryan; O'Neill, Jessica; Denktas, Ali E.; Panetta, Carmelo J.; Berger, Peter B.; Holmes, David.

In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, Vol. 63, No. 2, 01.10.2004, p. 152-157.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fasseas, Panayotis ; Orford, James L. ; Lennon, Ryan ; O'Neill, Jessica ; Denktas, Ali E. ; Panetta, Carmelo J. ; Berger, Peter B. ; Holmes, David. / Cutting balloon angioplasty vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in patients receiving intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2004 ; Vol. 63, No. 2. pp. 152-157.
@article{ce36474ab9634af8be769a8712023846,
title = "Cutting balloon angioplasty vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in patients receiving intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis",
abstract = "The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis prior to intracoronary brachytherapy (ICB). Cutting balloon angioplasty may reduce the incidence of uncontrolled dissection requiring adjunctive stenting and may limit {"}melon seeding{"} and geographic miss in patients with in-stent restenosis who are subsequently treated with ICB. We performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 134 consecutive patients with in-stent restenosis who were treated with ICB preceded by either CBA or conventional balloon angioplasty. We identified 44 patients who underwent CBA and ICB, and 90 control patients who underwent conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and ICB for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Adjunctive coronary stenting was performed in 13 patients (29.5{\%}) in the CBA/ICB group and 41 patients (45.6{\%}; P < 0.001) in the PTCA/ICB group. There was no difference in the injury length or active treatment (ICB) length. The procedural and angiographic success rates were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent angina pectoris, subsequent target lumen revascularization, or the composite endpoint of all four clinical outcomes (P > 0.05). Despite sound theoretical reasons why CBA may be better than conventional balloon angioplasty for treatment of in-stent restenosis with ICB, and despite a reduction in the need for adjunctive coronary stenting, we were unable to identify differences in clinical outcome.",
keywords = "Angioplasty, Brachytherapy, Cutting balloon, Restenosis",
author = "Panayotis Fasseas and Orford, {James L.} and Ryan Lennon and Jessica O'Neill and Denktas, {Ali E.} and Panetta, {Carmelo J.} and Berger, {Peter B.} and David Holmes",
year = "2004",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/ccd.20123",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "63",
pages = "152--157",
journal = "Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1522-1946",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cutting balloon angioplasty vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in patients receiving intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

AU - Fasseas, Panayotis

AU - Orford, James L.

AU - Lennon, Ryan

AU - O'Neill, Jessica

AU - Denktas, Ali E.

AU - Panetta, Carmelo J.

AU - Berger, Peter B.

AU - Holmes, David

PY - 2004/10/1

Y1 - 2004/10/1

N2 - The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis prior to intracoronary brachytherapy (ICB). Cutting balloon angioplasty may reduce the incidence of uncontrolled dissection requiring adjunctive stenting and may limit "melon seeding" and geographic miss in patients with in-stent restenosis who are subsequently treated with ICB. We performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 134 consecutive patients with in-stent restenosis who were treated with ICB preceded by either CBA or conventional balloon angioplasty. We identified 44 patients who underwent CBA and ICB, and 90 control patients who underwent conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and ICB for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Adjunctive coronary stenting was performed in 13 patients (29.5%) in the CBA/ICB group and 41 patients (45.6%; P < 0.001) in the PTCA/ICB group. There was no difference in the injury length or active treatment (ICB) length. The procedural and angiographic success rates were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent angina pectoris, subsequent target lumen revascularization, or the composite endpoint of all four clinical outcomes (P > 0.05). Despite sound theoretical reasons why CBA may be better than conventional balloon angioplasty for treatment of in-stent restenosis with ICB, and despite a reduction in the need for adjunctive coronary stenting, we were unable to identify differences in clinical outcome.

AB - The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis prior to intracoronary brachytherapy (ICB). Cutting balloon angioplasty may reduce the incidence of uncontrolled dissection requiring adjunctive stenting and may limit "melon seeding" and geographic miss in patients with in-stent restenosis who are subsequently treated with ICB. We performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 134 consecutive patients with in-stent restenosis who were treated with ICB preceded by either CBA or conventional balloon angioplasty. We identified 44 patients who underwent CBA and ICB, and 90 control patients who underwent conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and ICB for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Adjunctive coronary stenting was performed in 13 patients (29.5%) in the CBA/ICB group and 41 patients (45.6%; P < 0.001) in the PTCA/ICB group. There was no difference in the injury length or active treatment (ICB) length. The procedural and angiographic success rates were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent angina pectoris, subsequent target lumen revascularization, or the composite endpoint of all four clinical outcomes (P > 0.05). Despite sound theoretical reasons why CBA may be better than conventional balloon angioplasty for treatment of in-stent restenosis with ICB, and despite a reduction in the need for adjunctive coronary stenting, we were unable to identify differences in clinical outcome.

KW - Angioplasty

KW - Brachytherapy

KW - Cutting balloon

KW - Restenosis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4744355137&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4744355137&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ccd.20123

DO - 10.1002/ccd.20123

M3 - Article

C2 - 15390249

AN - SCOPUS:4744355137

VL - 63

SP - 152

EP - 157

JO - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1522-1946

IS - 2

ER -