A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison Between Sirolimus- and Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon for Revascularization of Coronary Arteries: The SIRPAC (SIRolimus-PAClitaxel) Study. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study compared the 12-month outcomes of patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) and sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) during coronary procedures.
  • Both types of drug-coated balloons are used in coronary angioplasty, but there hasn't been a direct comparison of their effectiveness.
  • Results showed no significant difference in rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or target lesion revascularization (TLR) between the two groups, suggesting that both treatments are similarly effective; however, further randomized studies are needed to validate these findings.

Article Abstract

Objective: Our study sought to compare the 12-month clinical outcome of patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) vs. sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) during coronary angioplasty.

Background: Drug-coated balloons represent an established therapeutic tool for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). A comparison between PCB and SCB is still lacking.

Methods: We performed an indirect comparison between two cohorts of patients previously included into two investigator-driven registries with clinical primary endpoints, 494 treated with the Elutax SV PCB (AR Baltic, Lithuania) from the DCB RISE registry, and 596 treated with the Magic Touch SCB (Concept Medical, India) from the EASTBOURNE registry. The primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 12-month clinical follow-up.

Results: After propensity score matching, a total of 580 patients were well matched for baseline clinical and procedural characteristics and were analyzed. At 12 months there was no significant difference between the matched DCB RISE and EASTBOURNE cohorts in terms of the primary endpoint MACE (10.3% DCB RISE vs. 10.7% EASTBOURNE, p = 0.892). No significant difference was observed also regarding the rate of TLR (7.9% DCB RISE vs. 8.3% EASTBOURNE; p = 0.879, respectively). By multivariate analysis, insulin-dependent diabetes was the only predictor of MACE.

Conclusions: In the SIRPAC study, the first indirect comparison between paclitaxel-coated and sirolimus coated balloons, no significant difference in clinical endpoints were found at 12-month follow-up. Randomized studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8373518PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2021.04.013DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

dcb rise
16
12-month clinical
8
indirect comparison
8
primary endpoint
8
clinical
5
comparison
4
comparison sirolimus-
4
sirolimus- paclitaxel-coated
4
paclitaxel-coated balloon
4
balloon revascularization
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!