MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study
Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study
Journal Article

Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard Angioplasty to Reduce Recurrent Restenosis in Diabetic Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of the Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Arteries: The DEBATE-ISR Study

2014
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Purpose To test the ability of a drug-eluting balloon (DEB) to reduce recurrent in-stent restenosis (ISR) in diabetic patients with femoropopliteal stents. Methods A prospective all-comers study [Drug-Eluting Balloon in Peripheral Intervention for In-Stent Restenosis (DEBATE-ISR); ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01558531] of symptomatic diabetic patients with femoropopliteal ISR undergoing treatment with paclitaxel-eluting balloons was designed to compare their 12-month recurrent restenosis rate with that of historical diabetic controls. From January 2010 to December 2011, 44 consecutive diabetic patients (32 men; mean age 74±11 years) were treated with DEBs and enrolled in the study. The control group comprised 42 diabetic patients (23 men; mean age 76±7 years) treated with a conventional balloon for femoropopliteal ISR from 2008 to 2009. Results No significant differences in terms of clinical, angiographic, or procedural characteristics were observed between the study groups. Lesion length was 132±86 mm in the DEB group vs. 137±82 mm in the BA group. Procedural success, defined as a residual stenosis <30% in the restenotic segment (stent +5 mm at proximal and distal edges), was obtained in all treated lesions. At 1-year follow-up, 6 patients died (3 in each group), and 1 patient in the BA group underwent major amputation. Recurrent restenosis, assessed by angiography (66%) or ultrasound (34%), occurred in 8/41 (19.5%) patients in the DEB group vs. 28/39 (71.8%) in the BA group (p<0.001). Target lesion revascularization for symptomatic recurrent restenosis was performed in 6/44 (13.6%) patients in the DEB vs.13/42 (31.0%) in the BA group (p=0.045). Conclusion Using DEB for treating femoropopliteal ISR led to a significant reduction in recurrent restenosis and repeat angioplasty at 1-year follow-up as compared to historical controls.