Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Drug-Coated Balloon Revascularization in Patients With Femoropopliteal Arterial Disease

BACKGROUND Randomized trials of drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-coated balloons (DCB) for femoropopliteal interventions reported superior patency rates for both strategies compared to standard balloon angioplasty. To date, head-to-head comparisons are missing. OBJECTIVES The authors sought to compare DES versus DCB for femoropopliteal lesions through 36 months. METHODS Within a multicenter, randomized trial, 150 patients with symptomatic femoropopliteal disease were randomly assigned to primary DES implantation or DCB angioplasty with bailout stenting after stratification for lesion length (<= 10 cm, >10 cm to <= 20 cm, and >20 cm to <= 30 cm). The primary effectiveness endpoint was primary patency at 12 months assessed by Kaplan-Meier. Secondary endpoints comprised major adverse events including death, major amputations, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS More than one-half of lesions were total occlusions, and the stenting rate was 25.3% in the DCB group. Kaplan-Meier estimates of primary patency were 79% and 80% for DES and DCB at 12 months (p = 0.96) but decreased to 54% and 38% through 36 months (p = 0.17), respectively. Freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization was >90% at 12 months but dropped to around 70% at 36 months in both groups. Overall, the mortality rate through 36 months was 7.3%, with 1 procedure-related death in the DCB group. Improvement of clinical outcomes was sustained through 36 months. CONCLUSIONS Patency rates at 12 months suggest comparable effectiveness and safety of DES versus DCB plus bailout stenting in femoropopliteal interventions; a trend in favor of the DES was observed up to 36 months. (Randomized Evaluation of the Zilver PTX Stent vs. Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloons for Treatment of Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease of the Femoropopliteal Artery [REAL PTX]; NCT01728441) (c) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).