Comparison of angiographic result and long-term outcome in patients with in-stent restenosis treated with cutting balloon or with scoring balloon angioplasty.

Abstract

Background: Lesion preparation with a cutting (CB) or scoring balloon (SB) is often used in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, there are no comparative studies.

Methods: We analyzed 81 patients (CB group: n = 38; SB group: n = 43) who had a calcified ISR from November 2019 to September 2021. The primary endpoint was strategy success (less than 20% residual stenosis); the secondary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events during the 1-year follow-up. Quantitative coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the strategy success.

Results: The patients in the CB group were more likely to have a severe calcified ISR (P = .001) and multiple stent layers (P = .001). A total of 4 patients (79.0%) reached the primary endpoint. Residual stenosis greater than 20% was more common in the CB group (39.5% vs 4.7%; P = .001). In the multivariate analysis, an effect of the intervention group on the achievement of the primary endpoint could be excluded (estimate 1.06; standard error 1.07; P = .322). The time interval of stent implantation prior to CB/SB (P = .007) and severe calcified ISR (P = .009) had a negative impact on reaching the primary endpoint. During the follow-up, there were no differences in rates of cardiac death (CB 2.5% vs. SB 1.2%; P = .598), acute myocardial infarction (CB 0% vs. SB 4.9%; P = .119), and target lesion failure (CB 3.7% vs SB 12.3%; P = .074).

Conclusions: In our cohort, multivariate analysis showed that lesion preparation with CB or SB must be considered equivalent in terms of angiographic results. Factors like severe calcified ISR and the time interval of prior stent implantation negatively influenced the angiographic outcome.