药物涂层球囊优于裸金属支架预防重度颅内动脉粥样硬化的再狭窄

药物涂层球囊优于裸金属支架预防重度颅内动脉粥样硬化的再狭窄

颅内动脉粥样硬化疾病的挑战

颅内动脉粥样硬化疾病(ICAD)仍然是血管神经学中的一个严峻挑战,是全球缺血性卒中最常见的原因之一。对于高危症状性狭窄的患者,单靠药物治疗往往不足,导致临床医生探索介入治疗。虽然裸金属支架(BMS)的放置传统上提供了恢复管腔直径的机械解决方案,但这种方法的长期疗效常常因支架内再狭窄(ISR)而受到削弱。再狭窄由新生内膜增生驱动,是复发性脑血管事件的主要原因,需要更持久的治疗策略。

药物涂层球囊(DCBs)通过直接向血管壁输送抗增殖剂而不留下永久性金属支架,已经彻底改变了外周和冠状动脉疾病的治疗。然而,它们在脆弱的颅内循环中的应用一直是一个研究热点。最近发表在《放射学》上的DR. BEYOND研究是一项多中心随机对照试验,提供了比较DCB血管成形术与传统BMS放置治疗症状性ICAD的里程碑证据。

研究亮点

该试验为高危ICAD的管理提供了几个关键见解:

  • DCB血管成形术在6个月造影再狭窄率(11%)方面显著低于BMS放置(29%)。
  • 6个月时的症状性再狭窄在DCB组明显减少(1%对10%)。
  • 30天至1年内复发性缺血事件的风险在使用DCBs治疗的患者中显著降低(4%对13%)。
  • 安全性结果,特别是30天内的卒中或死亡率,在两组之间相当。

试验设计与方法

DR. BEYOND试验是一项在中国14家三级医院进行的前瞻性多中心随机对照试验。该研究于2021年7月至2023年3月期间招募了209名参与者。符合条件的参与者是有症状的ICAD患者,其狭窄程度为70%-99%,且药物治疗无效。

参与者以1:1的比例随机分配接受DCB血管成形术(n=103)或BMS放置(n=106)。主要终点是在6个月时通过数字减影血管造影(DSA)确定的再狭窄率。次要终点包括6个月时的症状性再狭窄和临床结局,如复发性缺血事件和1年内的死亡率。研究人员利用广义线性和Cox回归模型评估两组之间的差异,确保研究结果具有坚实的统计基础。

疗效结果:显著的临床转变

主要结局数据显示,DCB血管成形术具有明显优势。在完成6个月DSA随访的164名参与者中,DCB组的再狭窄率为11%,而BMS组的再狭窄率为29%。这代表风险比为0.38(95% CI: 0.19, 0.78;P = .006),表明DCB治疗将再狭窄的风险降低了超过60%。

临床疗效不仅限于影像学发现。DCB组的症状性再狭窄发生率为1%,而BMS组为10%(P = .02)。最重要的是,从第30天到1年的复发性缺血事件发生率在DCB组显著较低(4%对13%;危险比0.31;P = .04)。这些发现表明,药物涂层球囊的生物作用提供了比单独机械支架更稳定和持久的治疗效果。

安全性和手术考虑

由于围手术期卒中或血管破裂的风险,颅内介入治疗的安全性是首要关注点。DR. BEYOND试验发现,DCB组的30天卒中或死亡率为6%,BMS组为5%。差异无统计学意义(危险比1.24;P = .73),表明DCB血管成形术不会增加相对于裸金属支架的急性手术风险。

DCBs允许输送紫杉醇,这是一种亲脂性细胞毒性剂,可抑制血管平滑肌细胞的迁移和增殖。与支架不同,支架作为异物留在体内并可能引发慢性炎症反应,DCB在手术后不会留下任何东西,可能保留血管的自然反应性并减少长期血栓并发症的风险。

专家评论和临床意义

该试验的结果代表了症状性ICAD治疗范式的潜在转变。历史上,SAMMPRIS和VISSIT试验强调了颅内支架的风险,导致更谨慎的方法和对积极药物管理的偏好。然而,对于尽管进行了最佳药物治疗仍继续出现症状的患者,DR. BEYOND数据表明,DCB血管成形术提供了一种比裸金属支架更安全、更有效的替代方案。

临床医生应注意,尽管结果令人鼓舞,但该研究是在特定人群和高容量三级中心进行的。其对其他种族群体或低容量中心的普遍性需要进一步验证。此外,比较对象是裸金属支架;未来的研究将DCBs与现代药物洗脱支架(DES)或专门的药物管理队列进行比较,将进一步明确DCBs在临床工作流程中的最佳角色。

结论

DR. BEYOND试验提供了高质量的证据,表明药物涂层球囊血管成形术在减少高危症状性ICAD患者的造影和症状性再狭窄方面优于裸金属支架放置。随着1年复发性缺血事件的显著减少和与传统支架相当的安全性,DCBs成为神经介入治疗中的高效工具。随着医学界继续完善卒中预防策略,这些发现支持将DCB技术纳入难治性颅内动脉粥样硬化疾病的标准化治疗。

资金来源和试验注册

本研究得到了中国国家卫生和研究基金的支持。试验在中国临床试验注册中心注册,编号为ChiCTR2100046829。

参考文献

管S,童X,李X等. 药物涂层球囊用于症状性颅内狭窄疾病的介入治疗:一项多中心随机对照试验. 放射学. 2026;318(1):e250893. doi: 10.1148/radiol.250893。

Drug-Coated Balloons Superior to Bare-Metal Stents in Preventing Restenosis for High-Grade Intracranial Atherosclerosis

Drug-Coated Balloons Superior to Bare-Metal Stents in Preventing Restenosis for High-Grade Intracranial Atherosclerosis

The Challenge of Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease

Intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) remains a formidable challenge in vascular neurology, serving as one of the most common causes of ischemic stroke worldwide. For patients with high-grade symptomatic stenosis, medical management alone often proves insufficient, leading clinicians to explore endovascular interventions. While bare-metal stent (BMS) placement has traditionally provided a mechanical solution to restore luminal diameter, the long-term efficacy of this approach is frequently undermined by in-stent restenosis (ISR). Restenosis, driven by neointimal hyperplasia, is a primary driver of recurrent cerebrovascular events, necessitating more durable therapeutic strategies.

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs), which deliver antiproliferative agents directly to the vessel wall without leaving a permanent metallic scaffold, have revolutionized the treatment of peripheral and coronary artery disease. However, their application in the delicate intracranial circulation has remained a subject of intense investigation. The DR. BEYOND study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial recently published in Radiology, provides landmark evidence comparing DCB angioplasty against traditional BMS placement for symptomatic ICAD.

Study Highlights

The trial yielded several critical insights for the management of high-grade ICAD:

  • DCB angioplasty resulted in a significantly lower rate of 6-month angiographic restenosis (11%) compared to BMS placement (29%).
  • Symptomatic restenosis at 6 months was markedly reduced in the DCB cohort (1% vs 10%).
  • The risk of recurrent ischemic events between 30 days and 1 year was substantially lower for patients treated with DCBs (4% vs 13%).
  • Safety outcomes, specifically 30-day stroke or death rates, were comparable between both intervention groups.

Trial Design and Methodology

The DR. BEYOND trial was a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted across 14 tertiary hospitals in China. The study enrolled 209 participants between July 2021 and March 2023. Eligible participants were adults with symptomatic ICAD characterized by high-grade stenosis (70%-99%) who had failed medical therapy.

Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either DCB angioplasty (n=103) or BMS placement (n=106). The primary endpoint was the rate of restenosis at 6 months, as determined by digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Secondary endpoints included symptomatic restenosis at 6 months and clinical outcomes such as recurrent ischemic events and mortality up to 1 year. The researchers utilized generalized linear and Cox regression models to evaluate the differences between the two groups, ensuring a robust statistical foundation for the findings.

Efficacy Results: A Significant Clinical Shift

The primary outcome data revealed a clear advantage for DCB angioplasty. Among the 164 participants who completed the 6-month DSA follow-up, the restenosis rate in the DCB group was 11%, whereas the BMS group experienced a 29% restenosis rate. This represents a risk ratio of 0.38 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.78; P = .006), indicating that DCB treatment reduces the risk of restenosis by more than 60% compared to bare-metal stenting.

Clinical efficacy extended beyond imaging findings. Symptomatic restenosis occurred in only 1% of the DCB group compared to 10% in the BMS group (P = .02). Perhaps most importantly for long-term patient care, the rate of recurrent ischemic events from day 30 to one year was significantly lower in the DCB group (4% vs 13%; Hazard Ratio 0.31; P = .04). These findings suggest that the biological action of the drug-coated balloon provides a more stable and lasting therapeutic effect than mechanical stenting alone.

Safety and Procedural Considerations

Safety is a paramount concern in intracranial interventions due to the risk of periprocedural stroke or vessel rupture. The DR. BEYOND trial found that the 30-day stroke or death rate was 6% in the DCB group and 5% in the BMS group. The difference was not statistically significant (Hazard Ratio 1.24; P = .73), suggesting that DCB angioplasty does not introduce additional acute procedural risks compared to the established standard of bare-metal stenting.

The use of DCBs allows for the delivery of paclitaxel, a lipophilic cytotoxic agent that inhibits the migration and proliferation of vascular smooth muscle cells. Unlike a stent, which remains as a foreign body and can trigger a chronic inflammatory response, the DCB leaves nothing behind after the procedure, potentially preserving the natural vasoreactivity of the vessel and reducing the long-term risk of thrombotic complications.

Expert Commentary and Clinical Implications

The results of this trial represent a potential shift in the treatment paradigm for symptomatic ICAD. Historically, the SAMMPRIS and VISSIT trials highlighted the risks of intracranial stenting, leading to a more cautious approach and a preference for aggressive medical management. However, for patients who continue to experience symptoms despite optimal medical therapy, the DR. BEYOND data suggests that DCB angioplasty offers a safer and more effective alternative to bare-metal stents.

Clinicians should note that while the results are promising, the study was conducted in a specific population at high-volume tertiary centers. The generalizability to other ethnic groups or lower-volume centers requires further validation. Additionally, the comparison was made against bare-metal stents; future research comparing DCBs to modern drug-eluting stents (DES) or specialized medical management cohorts would further clarify the optimal role of DCBs in the clinical workflow.

Conclusion

The DR. BEYOND trial provides high-quality evidence that drug-coated balloon angioplasty is superior to bare-metal stent placement for reducing both angiographic and symptomatic restenosis in patients with high-grade symptomatic ICAD. With a significant reduction in 1-year recurrent ischemic events and a safety profile comparable to traditional stenting, DCBs emerge as a highly effective tool in the neuro-interventional armamentarium. As the medical community continues to refine stroke prevention strategies, these findings support the integration of DCB technology into the standard care for refractory intracranial atherosclerotic disease.

Funding and Trial Registration

This study was supported by various national health and research grants in China. The trial is registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry under number ChiCTR2100046829.

References

Guan S, Tong X, Li X, et al. Drug-coated Balloon for Endovascular Treatment of Symptomatic Intracranial Stenotic Disease: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Radiology. 2026;318(1):e250893. doi: 10.1148/radiol.250893.

药物涂层球囊在减少症状性颅内狭窄再狭窄方面优于裸金属支架

药物涂层球囊在减少症状性颅内狭窄再狭窄方面优于裸金属支架

引言:颅内再狭窄的挑战

症状性颅内动脉粥样硬化性疾病(ICAD)是全球中风的主要原因之一,尤其是在亚洲人群中。虽然药物治疗是首选方案,但高危狭窄(70-99%)的患者通常需要进行介入治疗,因为存在较高的复发性缺血事件风险。历史上,裸金属支架(BMS)提供了一种机械解决方案来缓解血管狭窄,但这种方法一直受到高支架内再狭窄(ISR)率的困扰。金属支架引发的炎症反应常导致新生内膜增生,最终使血管再次闭塞。

药物涂层球囊(DCB)通过直接向血管壁输送抗增殖药物(如紫杉醇),而不留下永久性异物,成为一种有前景的替代方案。最近发表在《放射学》杂志上的DR. BEYOND试验是一项多中心随机对照试验,提供了有力证据,表明这项技术是否最终能够克服传统支架在颅内循环中的局限性。

DR. BEYOND试验亮点

  • DCB血管成形术将6个月造影再狭窄的风险降低了62%,相较于裸金属支架。
  • DCB组的症状性再狭窄显著较低(1% vs 10%)。
  • 接受DCB治疗的患者在术后30天至1年内复发性缺血事件的风险降低了69%。
  • 围手术期安全性(30天内中风或死亡)在两种干预措施之间相当。

研究设计和方法

DR. BEYOND研究是一项在中国14家三级医院进行的前瞻性多中心随机对照试验。研究人员招募了209名参与者(中位年龄59岁),他们患有症状性ICAD和高危狭窄(70-99%)。参与者以1:1的比例随机分配接受DCB血管成形术(n=103)或BMS置入(n=106)。

主要疗效终点是在6个月时的再狭窄率,通过数字减影血管造影(DSA)严格评估。再狭窄定义为治疗部位狭窄>50%或残余狭窄绝对增加>20%。次要终点包括6个月的症状性再狭窄和从30天到1年的临床结果,特别是关注目标血管区域的复发性缺血性中风。

关键发现:疗效和安全性

造影和症状性再狭窄

结果显示,DCB在维持血管通畅方面明显优于BMS。在6个月的DSA随访中,DCB组的再狭窄率为11%(11/103),而BMS组为29%(31/106)(风险比[RR] 0.38;95% CI: 0.19, 0.78;P = .006)。或许更具临床意义的是症状性再狭窄的减少——狭窄导致新的神经系统缺陷的情况——仅发生在DCB组的1%(1/103),而BMS组为10%(10/106)(RR, 0.13;95% CI: 0.02, 0.96;P = .02)。

长期临床结果

DCB的益处不仅体现在造影结果上,还延伸到了长期的临床保护作用。从术后30天到1年的随访期间,DCB组的复发性缺血事件发生率显著低于BMS组(4% vs 13%),危险比(HR)为0.31(95% CI: 0.10, 0.94;P = .04)。这表明预防早期再狭窄可以直接降低晚期中风的风险。

安全性

鉴于脑血管的脆弱性,颅内介入的安全性是首要考虑的问题。试验发现,在30天内中风或死亡的复合安全终点方面,两组之间没有显著差异,分别发生在DCB组的6%(6/103)和BMS组的5%(5/106)(HR, 1.24;95% CI: 0.38, 4.05;P = .73)。这表明使用药物涂层球囊不会引入额外的急性手术风险,与传统支架相比。

临床解读和机制见解

试验的成功可以归因于紫杉醇的药理动力学。当球囊充气时,药物被转移到动脉壁,抑制平滑肌细胞的迁移和增殖——这是新生内膜增生的主要驱动因素。与支架不同,DCB不会留下任何永久性的炎症刺激物或潜在的血栓形成源,允许血管进行正向重塑。

临床医生应注意,尽管BMS用作对照组,但该试验填补了SAMMPRIS和VISSIT等先前研究留下的关键空白,这些研究强调了侵入性介入治疗的高风险。DR. BEYOND的结果表明,设备的选择是长期成功的关键决定因素。通过最小化机械扩张后经常发生的再狭窄,DCB可能为高危ICAD患者提供更持久的解决方案。

专家评论和局限性

虽然结果令人信服,但一些细微之处值得讨论。首先,试验使用裸金属支架作为对照组。在某些地区,药物洗脱支架(DES)也用于ICAD的非标签用途,未来DCB与DES之间的头对头试验将具有重要价值。其次,研究人群全部为中国患者。由于ICAD的形态和患病率在不同种族之间可能存在显著差异,因此在西方人群中进一步验证以确保普遍性是必要的。

此外,DCB所需的技术专长——特别是需要仔细预扩张以确保药物涂层球囊能够到达病变部位而不会失去涂层——意味着这些结果最适用于高容量、三级卒中中心。”不留异物”策略虽然优雅,但需要精确的患者选择和程序执行。

结论

DR. BEYOND试验确立了药物涂层球囊血管成形术在治疗高危症状性颅内狭窄患者方面优于裸金属支架。通过大幅减少造影和症状性再狭窄,DCBs为这一具有挑战性的患者群体提供了更安全、更有效的二级中风预防途径。随着介入技术的不断进步,向临时支架和药物递送系统转变似乎是改善ICAD长期血管健康最有前景的方向。

参考文献

1. Guan S, Tong X, Li X, et al. 药物涂层球囊用于症状性颅内狭窄疾病的血管内治疗:一项多中心随机对照试验. Radiology. 2026;318(1):e250893. doi:10.1148/radiol.250893。

2. Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ, Derdeyn CP, et al. 支架植入术与强化药物治疗颅内动脉狭窄的比较. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):993-1003。

3. Zaidat OO, Fitzsimmons BF, Woodward BK, et al. 可扩张颅内支架与药物治疗对症状性颅内狭窄患者中风风险的影响:VISSIT随机临床试验. JAMA. 2015;313(12):1240-1248。

资金和支持

该研究在中国临床试验注册中心(ChiCTR2100046829)注册。资金由中国的相关国家卫生和研究资助提供。

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

发表回复