Affiliations 

  • 1 Cardiology Department, Ospedale San Carlo Borromeo, Milan, Italy; Cardiology Department, Ospedale Fatebenefratelli, Milan, Italy
  • 2 Cardiology Department, Ospedale Niguarda, Milan, Italy
  • 3 Cardiology Department, Ospedale Fatebenefratelli, Milan, Italy
  • 4 Cardiology Department, Sultanah Aminah Hospital Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
  • 5 Cardiology Department, Hospital General Universitario de Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
  • 6 Cardiology Department, European Hospital, Roma, Italy
  • 7 Cardiology Department, Institute Jantung Negara, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 8 Cardiology Department, Ospedale S. Antonio Abate, Trapani, Italy
  • 9 Cardiology Department, Ospedale di Sondrio, Sondrio, Italy
  • 10 Cardiology Department, Hospital Lucus Augusti, Lugo, Spain
  • 11 Cardiology Department, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, India
  • 12 Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, Division of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Public Health, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
  • 13 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele-Milan, Italy, and Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Rozzano-Milan, Italy
  • 14 Fondazione Ricerca e Innovazione Cardiovascolare, Milan, Italy; DCB Academy, Milan, Italy. Electronic address: bcortese@gmail.com
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed), 2024 Jul;77(7):527-536.
PMID: 38056772 DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2023.11.010

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The PEACE study (Performance of a sirolimus-eluting balloon strategy in acute and chronic coronary syndromes) investigated for the first time whether a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) (Magic Touch, Concept Medical, India) is associated with different outcomes depending on whether it is used in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or chronic coronary syndromes (CCS).

METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis from the all-comers EASTBOURNE Registry (NCT03085823). Out of 2083 patients enrolled, an SCB was used to treat 968 (46.5%) ACS and 1115 (53.5%) CCS patients. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization at 12 months, while secondary endpoints were angiographic success and major adverse cardiovascular events.

RESULTS: Baseline demographics, mean reference vessel diameter and mean lesion length were comparable between ACS and CCS. Predilatation was more commonly performed in ACS (P=.007). SCB was inflated at a standard pressure in both groups with a slight trend toward longer inflation time in ACS. Angiographic success was high in both groups (ACS 97.4% vs CCS 97.7%, P=.820) with limited bailout stenting. Similarly, at 12 months the cumulative incidence of target lesion revascularization (ACS 6.6% vs CCS 5.2%, P=.258) was comparable between ACS and CCS. Conversely, a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events in acute presenters was mainly driven by myocardial infarction recurrencies (ACS 10.4% vs CCS 8.3%, P=.009). In-stent restenosis showed a higher proportion of target lesion revascularization and major adverse cardiovascular events than de novo lesions, independently of the type of presentation at the index procedure.

CONCLUSIONS: This SCB shows good performance in terms of acute and 1-year outcomes independently of the clinical presentation.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.