A Prospective Randomized Trial of Drug-Eluting Balloons Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of Drug-Eluting Stents The RIBS IV Randomized Clinical Trial

作者：Alfonso, Fernando^*; Perez-Vizcayno, Maria Jose; Cardenas, Alberto; del Blanco, Bruno Garcia; Garcia-Touchard, Arturo; Lopez-Minguez, Jose Ramon; Benedicto, Amparo; Masotti, Monica; Zueco, Javier; Iniguez, Andres; Velazquez, Maite; Moreno, Raul; Mainar, Vicente; Dominguez, Antonio; Pomar, Francisco; Melgares, Rafael; Rivero, Fernando; Jimenez-Quevedo, Pilar; Gonzalo, Nieves; Fernandez, Cristina; Macaya, Carlos

来源：Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2015, 66(1): 23-33.

DOI：10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.063

• angiography
• percutaneous coronary intervention
• proliferation
• revascularization

BACKGROUND Treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a major challenge. @@@ OBJECTIVES This study evaluated the comparative efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients presenting with DES-ISR. @@@ METHODS The study design of this multicenter randomized clinical trial assumed superiority of EES for the primary endpoint, in-segment minimal lumen diameter at the 6- to 9-month angiographic follow-up. @@@ RESULTS A total of 309 patients with DES-ISR from 23 Spanish university hospitals were randomly allocated to DEB (n = 154) or EES (n = 155). At late angiography (median 247 days; 90% of eligible patients), patients in the EES arm had a significantly larger minimal lumen diameter (2.03 +/- 0.7 mm vs. 1.80 +/- 0.6 mm; p < 0.01) (absolute mean difference: 0.23 mm; 95% CI: 00.7 to 0.38), net lumen gain (1.28 +/- 0.7 mm vs. 1.01 +/- 0.7 mm; p < 0.01), and lower percent diameter stenosis (23 +/- 22% vs. 30 +/- 22%; p < 0.01) and binary restenosis rate (11% vs. 19%; p = 0.06), compared with patients in the DEB arm. Consistent results were observed in the in-lesion analysis. At the 1-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), the main clinical outcome measure (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) was significantly reduced in the EES arm (10% vs. 18%; p = 0.04; hazard ratio: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.98), mainly driven by a lower need for target vessel revascularization (8% vs. 16%; p = 0.035). @@@ CONCLUSIONS In patients with DES-ISR, EES provided superior long-term clinical and angiographic results compared with DEB.

• 出版日期2015-7-7