Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis
Authors: Robert W. Yeh, Richard Shlofmitz, Jeffrey Moses, William Bachinsky, Suhail Dohad, Steven Rudick, Robert Stoler, Brian K. Jefferson, William Nicholson, John Altman, Cinthia Bateman, Amar Krishnaswamy, J. Aaron Grantham, Frank J. Zidar, Steven P. Marso, Jennifer A. Tremmel, Cindy Grines, Mustafa I. Ahmed, Azeem Latib, Behnam Tehrani, J. Dawn Abbott, Wayne Batchelor, Paul Underwood, Dominic J. Allocco, Ajay J. Kirtane, Richard Shlofmitz, Jeffrey Moses, William Bachinsky, Suhail Dohad, Steven Rudick, Robert Stoler, Brian Jefferson, William Nicholson, John Altman, Robert Yeh, Cinthia Tjan Bateman, Amar Krishnaswamy, J. Aaron Grantham, Francis Zidar, Rajendran Sabapathy, Jennifer Tremmel, Cindy Grines, Mustafa Ahmed, Azeem Latib, Behnam Tehrani, Khaldoon Alaswad, Carey Kimmelstiel, William Dixon, Arthur Reitman, Lawrence Ang, Justin Levisay, Jinnette Abbott, Kathleen Kearney, Farouc Jaffer, Saroj Neupane, Kevin Croce, Kendrick Shunk, Angela Taylor, Matthew Saybolt, Claro Diaz, Alpesh Shah, Kapil Lotun, Johannes Brechtken, Himanshu Agarwal, Rajan Patel
Journal: JAMA (2024)

Importance Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States. Objective To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length &amp;amp;lt;26 mm and reference vessel diameter &amp;amp;gt;2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023. Interventions Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure—defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death—was tested for superiority. Results Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel–related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253