OBJECTIVE: The application of 2 distinct and simultaneously applied drug-delivery platforms for the treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) has not been studied. This study investigated the outcomes of femoropopliteal disease treated with drug-coated balloon (DCB) followed by placement of drug-eluting stent (DES) when a bail-out procedure is required.
METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective study enrolling 22 consecutive patients (23 limbs) treated with DCB + DES. Bail-out stenting was performed for flow-limiting postangioplasty dissections and/or suboptimal angiographic result, such as residual stenosis. Procedural success (<30% residual stenosis) and the incidence of major adverse limb event (MALE) during an average follow-up of 15.2 months were estimated.
RESULTS: Among the 22 patients (23 limbs), 14 presented with claudication and 8 with critical limb ischemia. The majority of the lesions were Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus class C/D, with a mean lesion length of 321 ± 130 mm. DCB angioplasty was performed with Stellarex (Philips) in 6 cases and In.Pact DCB (Medtronic) in 16 cases. Eluvia DES (Boston Scientific) was used for bail-out stenting in all cases (in 10 limbs for flow-limiting dissection and in 13 limbs for suboptimal angiographic result due to significant residual stenosis and/or recoil). A single Eluvia DES was used in 15 cases, while multiple Eluvia DESs were used in 8 cases. Procedural success was achieved in all but 1 case where persistent recoil occurred in a heavily calcified lesion. During an average follow-up of 15 months, restenosis or reocclusion of the target vessel was observed in 6 cases (26.1%), although only 3 patients required repeat revascularization (13.0%). During follow-up, 1 death and 1 major amputation occurred, both in patients who had originally presented with critical limb ischemia. Additionally, on routine duplex ultrasound, there were no cases of aneurysm formation at the sites of Eluvia stent placement.
CONCLUSION: DCB with provisional DES implantation could be a viable treatment option for cases of suboptimal DCB results, without apparent additional cardiovascular or limb-related risks. Additional studies are needed to determine the risks and benefits of double-dose paclitaxel approach, especially for those patients with significant residual stenosis after DCB.