Prospective randomized trial of paclitaxel-coated balloon versus bare-metal stent in high bleeding risk patients with de novo coronary artery lesions.

In patients with high bleeding risk, percutaneous coronary intervention is still debated. This study compared 9-month angiographic and physiologic results in patients with high bleeding risk and de novo coronary lesions treated with either paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) or bare-metal stent (BMS).A total of 40 patients (40 lesions) with high bleeding risk who underwent successful balloon angioplasty with fractional flow reserve (FFR) after balloon angioplasty more than 0.80 were randomized 1: 1 to treatment with PCB versus BMS. Dual antiplatelet therapy was limited to 1 month after the procedure.Baseline clinical and lesional characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the postprocedural FFR (0.87 ± 0.06 in PCB vs. 0.89 ± 0.06 in BMS, P = 0.254). At 9 months, late luminal loss was significantly lower in the PCB group (0.2 ± 0.3 vs. 1.2 ± 0.8 mm, P < 0.001). Restenosis only occurred in the BMS group (0 vs. 25.0%, P = 0.049).In patients with high bleeding risk, FFR-guided PCB treatment showed superior efficacy in terms of angiographic and physiologic patency compared with BMS at mid-term follow-up with only 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT02456402).