Abstract:Abstract Background Treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions remains challenging; a simple strategy has been preferred as of late, but the disadvantage is ostium stenosis or even occlusion of the side branch (SB). Only a few single-center studies investigating the combination of a drug-eluting stent in the main branch followed by a drug-eluting balloon in the SB have been reported. This prospective, multicenter, randomized study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of a paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB) compared with regular balloon angioplasty (BA) in the treatment of non-left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions. Methods Between December 2014 and November 2015, a total of 222 consecutive patients with bifurcation lesions were enrolled in this study at ten Chinese centers. Patients were randomly allocated at a 1:1 ratio to a PEB group (n = 113) and a BA group (n = 109). The primary efficacy endpoint was angiographic target lesion stenosis at 9 months. Secondary efficacy and safety endpoints included target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, target lesion failure, major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCEs), all-cause death, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and thrombosis in target lesions. The main analyses performed in this clinical trial included case shedding analysis, base-value equilibrium analysis, effectiveness analysis, and safety analysis. SAS version 9.4 was used for the statistical analyses. Results At the 9-month angiographic follow-up, the difference in the primary efficacy endpoint of target lesion stenosis between the PEB (28.7% ± 18.7%) and BA groups (40.0% ± 19.0%) was –11.3% (95% confidence interval: –16.3% to –6.3%, P superiority <0.0001) in the intention-to-treat analysis, and similar results were recorded in the per-protocol analysis, demonstrating the superiority of PEB to BA. Late lumen loss was significantly lower in the PEB group than in the BA group (–0.06 ± 0.32 vs. 0.18 ± 0.34 mm, P < 0.0001). For intention-to-treat, there were no significant differences between PEB and BA in the 9-month percentages of MACCEs (0.9% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.16) or non-fatal myocardial infarctions (0 vs. 0.9%, P = 0.49). There were no clinical events of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, target lesion failure, all-cause death, cardiac death or target lesion thrombosis in either group. Conclusions In de novo non-left main coronary artery bifurcations treated with provisional T stenting, SB dilation with the PEB group demonstrated better angiographic results than treatment with regular BA at the 9-month follow-up in terms of reduced target lesion stenosis. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02325817; https://clinicaltrials.gov

A Randomized Comparison of a Novel Iopromide-Based Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Shenqi Versus SeQuent Please for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis.

A Randomized Comparison of Two Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis: the LONGTY ISR China Randomized Trial (LONGTY DCB Vs. SeQuent Please DCB).

Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons in In-Stent Restenosis

Biolimus-coated Versus Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis (BIO ASCEND ISR): a Randomised, Non-Inferiority Trial.

Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons in In-Stent Restenosis: The RESTORE ISR China Randomized Trial.

Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Two Types of Drug-Eluting Balloons (RESTORE DEB and SeQuent® Please) in the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (RESTORE ISR China).

Prognostic Implications of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Optical Coherence Tomography-Guided Neointimal Characteristics in Drug-Coated Balloon Treatment for In-Stent Restenosis

A prospective, multicenter, randomized trial of paclitaxel-coated balloon versus paclitaxel-eluting stent for the treatment of drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis: results from the PEPCAD China ISR trial.

A Randomized Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons for In-Stent Restenosis

Two-year results and subgroup analyses of the PEPCAD China in-stent restenosis trial: A prospective, multicenter, randomized trial for the treatment of drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis.

Drug-eluting Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents for the Management of In-Stent Restenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Observational Studies

Comparison of Drug-Coated Balloon and Drug-Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Small Vessel Disease (from the Dissolve SVD Randomized Trial).

TCTAP A-002 Paclitaxel-coated Balloon Versus Paclitaxel-eluting Stent for the Treatment of Diffuse DES In-stent Restenotic Lesions: A Substudy of PEPCAD China ISR Trial

Comparison of Two Different Drug-Coated Balloons in In-Stent Restenosis: The RESTORE ISR China Randomized Trial

Long-Term Follow-Up after Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis and De Novo Lesions Using SeQuent Please Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

TCT-273 Randomized Comparison of Two Different Drug-Coated Balloons in In-Stent Restenosis: the PROPAX Trial

Comparative long‐term efficacy and safety of two paclitaxel‐coated balloons with different coating strategies for the treatment of drug‐eluting coronary stent restenosis

Drug‐coated Balloon for the Treatment of Small Vessel Disease: 9 Months of Angiographic Results and 12 Months of Clinical Outcomes of the PEPCAD China SVD Study

A Drug-Eluting Balloon for the Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions in the Side Branch: a Prospective Multicenter Randomized (BEYOND) Clinical Trial in China

Comparative efficacy of interventional therapies and devices for coronary in-stent restenosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Design and Rationale of Targeted Therapy With a Sirolimus-Eluting, Biodegradable Polymer Coronary Stent in Chronic Total Occlusions (TARGET CTO): A Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Noninferiority Trial.