Coronary disease & ACSRandomised controlled trial

A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Sirolimus-Coated Balloon With Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon in De Novo Small Vessels

JACC Cardiovasc IntervPublished

  • Randomised controlled trial
  • multicentre
  • non-inferiority
  • prospective

Authors' conclusion

The SCB MagicTouch failed to demonstrate noninferiority for angiographic net lumen gain at 6 months compared to the PCB SeQuent Please Neo.

Study context

Population
Patients with de novo coronary small vessel disease; balloon sizing by optical coherence tomography109 completed angiographic follow-up
Participants
121 patients
Comparison
Sirolimus-coated balloon vs paclitaxel-coated balloon
Primary endpoint
Non-inferiority for angiographic net lumen gain
Follow-up
6 months

Primary result

Angiographic net lumen gain

Absolute difference

−0.23 mm

95% CI −0.37 to −0.09

P = 0.173 for non-inferiority

By group

SCB vs PCB
absolute difference −0.23 mm (95% CI −0.37 to −0.09); P for non-inferiority = 0.173

Non-inferiority margin 0.3 as printed, not drawn

As reported in the abstract

Further findings

Late lumen loss · smaller late loss with PCB

P < 0.001

OutcomeSCBPCBOR (95% CI)P value
Late lumen enlargement30.0%53.7%2.60 (1.22–5.67)P = 0.014
Binary restenosis32.8%12.5%3.41 (1.36–9.44)P = 0.012
OutcomeSCBPCBEstimateP value
Angiography-derived fractional flow ratio · follow-upmean 0.86 (SD 0.15)mean 0.91 (SD 0.09)P = 0.026
Vessels with ratio ≤0.80135

Original publication

A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Sirolimus-Coated Balloon With Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon in De Novo Small Vessels. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 23 October 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2023.09.026

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it