In-Stent Restenosis
Conditions
Keywords
In-stent restenosis, Drug-eluting balloon, Drug-eluting stent, Angiography, Minimal lumen diameter
Brief summary
Treatment of patients with bare metal stent restenosis remains a challenge. This study will assess which interventional strategy (paclitaxel-eluting balloon vs everolimus-eluting stent) is superior in the treatment of patients suffering from bare metal stent restenosis.
Detailed description
Treatment of patients with bare metal stent restenosis remains a major clinical and technical challenge. Currently, drug-eluting stents are widely used in the management of these patients. Recently, the value of the paclitaxel-eluting balloon in this clinical setting has been suggested. However, there is only scarce observational data on the value of this new balloon in patients with bare metal stent restenosis. This prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial will compare two different interventional strategies (namely, paclitaxel-eluting balloon vs everolimus-eluting stent) in the treatment of patients with bare metal stent restenosis.
Interventions
Balloon angioplasty
Stent implantation
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
PATIENT: * Age between 20 and 85 years * Signed informed consent * Acceptance of late angiographic control (6-9 months) * Angina and / or objective evidence of ischemia LESION: * In-Stent restenosis (\> 50% visual) any bare metal stent * Knowledge of prior stent location
Exclusion criteria
PATIENT: * Inclusion in another clinical research protocol * Women of childbearing age * Severe associated systemic disease (including renal or liver failure) * Severe depression of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF \<25%) * Disease that affects life expectancy * Recent myocardial infarction ( \<7 days) * Time of implantation of the previous BMS \<1 month * Severe difficulties expected for late angiographic study LESION: * Angiographic failure during implementation of initial stent(residual stenosis\> 50%) * Image of large thrombus in-stent (\> vessel diameter) * Tortuosity or Ca + + with very severe difficulties during prior stent deployment * Vessel diameter \<2 mm (visual estimate) * Restenosis only outside the stent (The edge of the stent is not affected) * Completely occlusive restenosis (100%, TIMI 0) * Very diffuse restenosis (\> 30 mm length)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Minimal lumen diameter | Late angiographic follow-up (6-9 months) | Comparison of minimal lumen diameter at late angiographic follow-up (6-9 months) between the 2 treatment strategies (by quantitative coronary angiography) |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Combined clinical and angiographic end-points | 6-9 months, 1 year and 3 years | A) Efficacy outcomes: A1) Angiographic: 1) Restenosis rate, 2) % diameter stenosis, 3) acute gain, 4) late loss, 5) net gain A2) Composite of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization and analysis of individual events B) Safety Outcomes: Stent thrombosis, Bleeding episodes. C) Pre-specified variables for subgroup analysis (RIBS I) D) Stratification (length and edge). Type of stent E) Influence of clinical variables and restenosis patterns on outcome |
Countries
Spain