Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal alternative treatment strategy to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) in left main (LM) coronary artery disease remains uncertain. METHODS: We retrospectively screened all intervention reports from an intervention database and extracted those mentioning an LM stent. We then manually confirmed reports involving LM ISR and divided them into two groups, those in which the patient received a new drug-eluting stent (new-DES) strategy, and those in which the patient received a drug-coated balloon (DCB) only. A composite endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and each individual endpoint were compared. We also performed a brief analysis of similar designed studies. RESULTS: Between the new-DES (n = 40) and DCB-only (n = 22) groups, during median respective follow-up times of 581.5 and 642.5 days, no significant statistical differences were detected in MACEs (50.0% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.974), cardiovascular death (27.5% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.214), nonfatal myocardial infarction (30.0% vs. 31.8%, p = 0.835), or target lesion revascularization (35.0% vs. 45.5%, p = 0.542). We analyzed four similar studies and found comparable MACE findings (odds ratio: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.44-1.67). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support both DCB angioplasty and repeat DES implantation for LMISR lesions in patients who were clinically judged to be unsuitable for CABG; the treatments achieved comparable clinical results in terms of MACEs in the medium term.