Propensity-score-matched comparison of safety, efficacy, and outcome of intravascular lithotripsy versus high-pressure PTCA in coronary calcified lesions

Abstract

Background: Data regarding safety, efficacy, and outcome of intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) in comparison to standard techniques are lacking. This study sought to compare IVL with non-compliant high-pressure balloon percutaneous coronary angioplasty (PTCA). Methods and results: We performed a retrospective propensity-score-matched study to compare procedural success in 57 consecutive patients who received IVL-guided PCI in calcified coronary lesions with 171 matched patients who were treated with high-pressure PTCA with a non-compliant (NC)-balloon. The mean minimal lumen diameter (MLD) for the IVL group was 1.08 ± 0.51 mm, and the median percent diameter stenosis on quantitative angiography was 70.2% (interquartile range, 60.2–78.6%). MLD in the high-pressure dilatation group was 0.97 ± 0.43 mm, and the median percent diameter stenosis was 71.5% (interquartile range, 58.5–77.0%). IVL-guided PCI reduced median stenosis to 17.5% (interquartile range, 9.3–19.8%) with an acute gain of 0.93 ± 0.7 mm. High-pressure dilatation resulted in a final median stenosis of 19.3% (interquartile range, 13.33–28.5%). Procedural success was significantly higher (82.5% vs. 61.4%; p: 0.0035) in the IVL group. MACE through 12 months occurred in 10.5% of cases in the IVL group and in 11.1% of the high-pressure group (p = 0.22). Angiographic complications (coronary dissection, slow or no reflow, new coronary thrombus formation, abrupt vessel closure) were very low (0.2% vs. 0.12%). Conclusion: IVL resulted in a significantly higher rate of procedural success compared to high- pressure NC-balloon dilatation in patients with calcified coronary lesions. The rate of MACE through 12 months was similar to the standard therapy.

Keywords

• Calcification
• High-pressure PTCA
• Lithotripsy
• Shockwave