What is the Role of Drug-Coated Balloons in Peripheral Artery Disease?
Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) is a prevalent circulatory condition characterized by narrowed arteries that reduce blood flow to the limbs, most commonly the legs. This can lead to pain, numbness, and in severe cases, non-healing wounds and limb loss [1, 2]. Traditional treatments for PAD include lifestyle modifications, medications, and revascularization procedures such as angioplasty and stenting. While these methods have improved patient outcomes, limitations such as restenosis—the re-narrowing of the treated artery—remain a significant challenge [5]. In response to these limitations, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have emerged as a promising therapeutic option, offering a novel approach to prevent restenosis and improve long-term patency in PAD patients. This academic blog post will delve into the molecular mechanisms, clinical applications, and future perspectives of DCBs in the management of PAD, without providing medical advice.
Molecular Basis of Drug-Coated Balloons
DCBs represent a significant advancement in endovascular therapy, primarily due to their ability to deliver an antiproliferative drug directly to the vessel wall during balloon inflation [8]. This localized drug delivery aims to inhibit smooth muscle cell proliferation, a key factor in the development of restenosis, without leaving behind a permanent implant. The effectiveness of DCBs hinges on several critical factors, including the rapid and efficient transfer of the drug, its retention within the vessel wall, and the specific pharmacological properties of the antiproliferative agent [9].
Key Drugs Used in DCBs
Currently, two primary drugs are approved for use in DCB coatings: paclitaxel and sirolimus. Both agents exert antiproliferative effects, but they differ in their molecular mechanisms and clinical profiles.
Paclitaxel
Paclitaxel is a highly lipophilic cytostatic chemotherapy drug that prevents cell division by stabilizing polymerized microtubules, leading to apoptosis [13, 15]. Its high lipophilicity facilitates increased passive absorption and prolonged retention in the vessel wall, contributing to its efficacy in preventing neointimal hyperplasia [15, 16]. Current paclitaxel-based DCBs for PAD typically deliver doses ranging from 2.0 to 3.5 µg/mm² [15].
Despite its effectiveness, paclitaxel has been associated with some safety concerns. Experimental models have shown that high doses can lead to tissue necrosis, vascular wall hemorrhage, and delayed healing [16]. Furthermore, meta-analyses have presented controversial data regarding a potential correlation between paclitaxel-based DCBs and increased mortality [18, 19]. However, larger studies have found no causal relationship, with some even reporting lower mortality rates in DCB groups compared to standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) [20, 21, 22]. Another concern is the potential for late lumen enlargement (LLE) and aneurysm formation, although the incidence of the latter remains largely unknown and is primarily documented in case reports [23, 25, 26].
Sirolimus
Sirolimus, a potent immunosuppressant, acts by binding to FKBP12, which then modulates the activity of mTOR, a protein kinase crucial for cell growth regulation [28]. This mechanism inhibits smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration without inducing apoptosis, offering a broader therapeutic window and increased safety margin compared to paclitaxel [29]. Sirolimus also exhibits anti-inflammatory properties, which are beneficial in preventing restenosis and acute stent thrombosis [30].
A challenge with sirolimus is its lower lipophilicity, which can limit its tissue bioavailability and retention, particularly in larger peripheral arteries [30]. To overcome this, newer sirolimus-based DCBs incorporate absorption enhancers and advanced coating technologies. Examples include the Magic Touch PTA, which uses Nanolute technology for sub-micron particle encapsulation in a phospholipid carrier, and the SELUTION DCB, which employs a biodegradable polymer with micro-reservoirs for controlled drug delivery [31]. These innovations aim to improve drug uptake and retention, with sirolimus demonstrating a longer half-life compared to paclitaxel, theoretically offering a more sustained therapeutic effect [34].
Balloon Coating and Excipients
The efficacy of DCBs is also significantly influenced by the balloon coating and the excipient used. Excipients are crucial for binding the drug and facilitating its dissolution and transfer from the balloon to the vessel wall [37]. Various excipients are employed, each impacting local drug transfer and concentration. For instance, the IN.PACT Admiral DCB uses urea, while the SeQuent Please DCB utilizes resveratrol. Other DCBs incorporate polysorbate/sorbitol, citrate ester, or polyethylene glycol [109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116]. The method of coating, whether crystalline or amorphous, also plays a vital role in ensuring even drug distribution and preventing premature wash-out, ultimately affecting drug retention and neointimal inhibition [40, 41].
Clinical Practice and Applications in PAD
Effective lesion preparation and appropriate imaging modalities are paramount for optimizing the outcomes of DCB angioplasty in PAD patients.
Lesion Preparation and Imaging
Proper lesion preparation, especially in complex and calcified lesions, significantly improves peri- and post-procedural clinical outcomes. This involves the use of various devices:
- **Standard, Cutting, and Scoring Balloons:** These balloons are used to prepare lesions, with cutting and scoring balloons offering controlled plaque incision and reduced barotrauma [42, 43].
- **Atherectomy Techniques:** These include orbital atherectomy (OA), rotational atherectomy (RA), directional atherectomy (DA), and laser atherectomy (LA). These techniques physically remove plaque, with studies demonstrating improved patency rates and reduced restenosis when used in conjunction with DCBs [45, 49, 52, 55]. For example, the DEFINITIVE AR trial showed superior technical success for DA + DCB compared to DCB alone [53].
- **Intravascular Lithotripsy (IVL):** This newer technique uses ultrasound waves to selectively crack intimal and medial calcium, allowing for better balloon expansion at lower pressures. Trials like Disrupt PAD III have shown that IVL prior to DCB angioplasty leads to greater procedural success and fewer flow-limiting dissections [58].
**Imaging Modalities:** Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) play an important role in guiding DCB angioplasty. While more data are needed for PAD, these modalities can accurately identify risk factors for restenosis and guide device selection, potentially leading to improved long-term clinical outcomes [61, 63].
Above-the-Knee (ATK) Lesions
DCBs have become an attractive alternative to stents for treating femoropopliteal (FP) lesions, particularly due to the high risk of restenosis associated with permanent implants in these mobile arteries [60, 65].
In-Stent Restenosis (ISR)
For FP-ISR, DCBs have demonstrated significant efficacy in reducing late lumen loss and improving patency. The PACUBA and FAIR trials, for instance, showed significantly higher primary patency rates and freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in DCB groups compared to standard PTA [67]. While some randomized controlled trials have presented controversial results, DCBs generally improve short-term outcomes and long-term patency for short focal lesions [227].
De Novo Lesions
Multiple clinical studies, including randomized controlled trials, have affirmed the safety and effectiveness of DCBs in both short and complex de novo FP lesions. Trials such as Tepe G, PACIFIER, LEVANT 2, BIOLUX p-I, and IN.PACT SFA have consistently shown that DCB angioplasty leads to significantly lower late lumen loss, reduced binary restenosis, and improved primary patency compared to conventional PTA [66, 70, 71, 72, 73]. The DRASTICO study also indicated comparable TLR rates between DCB treatment and drug-eluting stents [76].
Below-the-Knee (BTK) Lesions
BTK lesions present greater challenges due to their smaller vessel size and higher restenosis rates [46]. While DCBs are well-established for FP lesions, data for BTK lesions are still evolving.
De Novo Lesions
Studies like BIOLUX P-II, IN.PACT DEEP, and Lutonix BTK have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of DCBs in BTK lesions, showing comparable or improved patency rates and reduced TLR compared to standard PTA [77, 78, 79]. A systematic review further supported a significantly reduced TLR with paclitaxel-based DCBs in CLI patients with BTK lesions [80].
In-Stent Restenosis (ISR) in BTK Lesions
For BTK ISR, DCBs are emerging as a promising tool, though long-term clinical data are still needed. It is important to note that stent placement in BTK lesions is often considered off-label, and regulatory approvals for DCBs in this segment are still limited in some regions [82].
Future Perspectives
The field of DCB technology in PAD is continuously advancing. Ongoing clinical trials are comparing DCB angioplasty with open vascular surgery, which will provide crucial insights into comparative effectiveness [83]. Furthermore, the development of novel paclitaxel- and sirolimus-based DCBs with enhanced drug delivery systems is underway, aiming to improve long-term outcomes and expand treatment options for PAD patients [83].
Conclusion
Drug-coated balloons have revolutionized the treatment of peripheral artery disease by offering a compelling alternative to traditional angioplasty and stenting. Their ability to deliver antiproliferative drugs directly to the vessel wall has significantly improved patency rates and reduced restenosis across various lesion types and locations, particularly in above-the-knee arteries. While challenges remain, especially concerning long-term data for below-the-knee lesions and ongoing safety evaluations, the continuous innovation in drug formulations, balloon coatings, and lesion preparation techniques underscores the growing role of DCBs in the comprehensive management of PAD. Further research and clinical trials are essential to fully elucidate their long-term benefits and establish their optimal application in all PAD patient populations.
**Disclaimer:** This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult with a qualified healthcare professional for any health concerns or before making any decisions related to your health or treatment.
References
1. Horváth L., Németh N., Fehér G., Kívés Z., Endrei D., Boncz I. Epidemiology of Peripheral Artery Disease: Narrative Review. Life. 2022;12:1041. doi: 10.3390/life12071041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 2. Olinic M., Lazar F.-L., Onea H.-L., Homorodean C., Ober M., Tataru D., Spinu M., Achim A., Olinic D.-M. Peripheral Artery Disease Ultrasound Assessment in Predicting the Severity of Coronary Artery Disease. Life. 2024;14:333. doi: 10.3390/life14030333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 3. Martelli E., Enea I., Zamboni M., Federici M., Bracale U.M., Sangiorgi G., Martelli A.R., Messina T., Settembrini A.M. Focus on the Most Common Paucisymptomatic Vasculopathic Population, from Diagnosis to Secondary Prevention of Complications. Diagnostics. 2023;13:2356. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13142356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 4. Tătaru D.-A., Olinic M., Homorodean C., Ober M.-C., Spînu M., Lazăr F.-L., Onea L., Olinic D.-M. Correlation between Ultrasound Peak Systolic Velocity and Angiography for Grading Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis. J. Clin. Med. 2024;13:517. doi: 10.3390/jcm13020517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 5. Aboyans V., Ricco J.B., Bartelink M.E.L., Björck M., Brodmann M., Cohnert T., Collet J.P., Czerny M., De Carlo M., Debus S., et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteries Endorsed by: The European Stroke Organization (ESO)The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) Eur. Heart J. 2018;39:763–816. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 6. Soga Y., Iida O., Seki S.I., Kawasaki D., Anzai H., Ando H., Nakama T., Shinozaki N., Kozuki A., Ishihara M., et al. TCD-17187 Japan Investigators. Twenty-Four-Month Safety and Effectiveness of TCD-17187 Drug-Coated Balloon for Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Artery. Cardiovasc. Intervent Radiol. 2024;47:730–740. doi: 10.1007/s00270-024-03747-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 7. di Palma G., Sanchez-Jimenez E.F., Lazar L., Cortese B. Should paclitaxel be considered an old generation DCB? The limus era. Rev. Cardiovasc. Med. 2021;22:1323–1330. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2204138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 8. Chaddad R., El-Mokdad R., Lazar L., Cortese B. DCBs as an adjuvant tool to DES for very complex coronary lesions. Rev. Cardiovasc. Med. 2022;23:13. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2301013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 9. Gray W.A., Granada J.F. Drug-coated balloons for the prevention of vascular restenosis. Circulation. 2010;121:2672–2680. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.936922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 10. Maga P., Mikolajczyk T.P., Partyka L., Siedlinski M., Maga M., Krzanowski M., Malinowski K., Luc K., Nizankowski R., Bhatt D.L., et al. Involvement of CD8+ T cell subsets in early response to vascular injury in patients with peripheral artery disease in vivo. Clin. Immunol. 2018;94:26–33. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2018.06.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 11. Ferrer I.R., Araki K., Ford M.L. Paradoxical aspects of rapamycin immunobiology in transplantation. Am. J. Transplant. 2011;11:654–659. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03473.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 12. Vicari A.P., Luu R., Zhang N., Patel S., Makinen S.R., Hanson D.C., Weeratna R.D., Krieg A.M. Paclitaxel reduces regulatory T cell numbers and inhibitory function and enhances the anti-tumor effects of the TLR9 agonist PF-3512676 in the mouse. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2009;58:615–628. doi: 10.1007/s00262-008-0586-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 13. Long B.H., Fairchild C.R. Paclitaxel inhibits progression of mitotic cells to G1 phase by interference with spindle formation without affecting other microtubule functions during anaphase and telephase. Cancer Res. 1994;54:4355–4361. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 14. Giannakakou P., Robey R., Fojo T., Blagosklonny M.V. Low concentrations of paclitaxel induce cell type-dependent p53, p21 and G1/G2 arrest instead of mitotic arrest: Molecular determinants of paclitaxel-induced cytotoxicity. Oncogene. 2001;20:3806–3813. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1204487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 15. Kolodgie F.D., Pacheco E., Yahagi K., Mori H., Ladich E., Virmani R. Comparison of Particulate Embolization after Femoral Artery Treatment with IN.PACT Admiral versus Lutonix 035 Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons in Healthy Swine. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2016;27:1676–1685.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.06.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 16. Heldman A.W., Cheng L., Jenkins G.M., Heller P.F., Kim D.W., Ware M., Nater C., Hruban R.H., Rezai B., Abella B.S., et al. Paclitaxel stent coating inhibits neointimal hyperplasia at 4 weeks in a porcine model of coronary restenosis. Circulation. 2001;103:2289–2295. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.103.18.2289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 17. Steiner S., Schmidt A., Zeller T., Tepe G., Thieme M., Maiwald L., Schröder H., Euringer W., Popescu C., Brechtel K., et al. Low-Dose vs High-Dose Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Femoropopliteal Lesions: 2-Year Results from the COMPARE Trial. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2022;15:2093–2102. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 18. Katsanos K., Spiliopoulos S., Kitrou P., Krokidis M., Karnabatidis D. Risk of Death Following Application of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons and Stents in the Femoro-popliteal Artery of the Leg: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e011245. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 19. Rocha-Singh K.J., Duval S., Jaff M.R., Schneider P.A., Ansel G.M., Lyden S.P., Mullin C.M., Ioannidis J.P.A., Misra S., Tzafriri A.R., et al. Mortality and Paclitaxel-Coated Devices: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis. Circulation. 2020;141:1859–1869. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.044697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 20. Secemsky E.A., Kundi H., Weinberg I., Jaff M.R., Krawisz A., Parikh S.A., Beckman J.A., Mustapha J., Rosenfield K., Yeh R.W. Association of Survival With Femoropopliteal Artery Revascularization With Drug-Coated Devices. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4:332–340. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.0325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 21. Freisinger E., Koeppe J., Gerss J., Goerlich D., Malyar N.M., Marschall U., Faldum A., Reinecke H. Mortality after use of paclitaxel-based devices in peripheral arteries: A real-world safety analysis. Eur. Heart J. 2020;41:3732–3739. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz698. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 22. Böhme T., Noory E., Beschorner U., Jacques B., Bürgelin K., Macharzina R., Gebauer E., Cheung F., Lechner P., Nührenberg T., et al. Evaluation of Mortality Following Paclitaxel Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty of Femoropopliteal Lesions in the Real World. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2020;13:2052–2061. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.04.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 23. Yamamoto T., Sawada T., Uzu K., Takaya T., Kawai H., Yasaka Y. Possible mechanism of late lumen enlargement after treatment for de novo coronary lesions with drug-coated balloon. Int. J. Cardiol. 2020;321:30–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.07.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 24. Bisdas T., Beropoulis E., Argyriou A., Torsello G., Stavroulakis K. 1-Year All-Comers Analysis of the Eluvia Drug-Eluting Stent for Long Femoropopliteal Lesions After Suboptimal Angioplasty. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2018;11:957–966. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 25. Huang J., Zhang J.Y., Wei M., Yuan M.J., Lu Z.G. Coronary Artery Aneurysm Formation after Drug-Coated Balloon Treatment. Chin. Med. J. 2018;131:2249–2251. doi: 10.4103/0366-6999.240819. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 26. Diamantopoulos A., Gupta Y., Zayed H., Katsanos K. Paclitaxel-coated balloons and aneurysm formation in peripheral vessels. J. Vasc. Surg. 2015;62:1320–1322. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.03.291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 27. Scheller B., Gemeinhardt O., Kleber F.X. Late lumen enlargement after treatment of de-novo lesions with drug coated balloon catheters—Glagov effect or plaque regression? Int. J. Cardiol. 2021;329:79–81. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.12.061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 28. Wang D., Eisen H.J. Mechanistic Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) Inhibitors. Handb. Exp. Pharmacol. 2022;272:53–72. doi: 10.1007/164_2021_553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 29. Ali R.M., Abdul Kader M.A.S.K., Wan Ahmad W.A., Ong T.K., Liew H.B., Omar A.F., Mahmood Zuhdi A.S., Nuruddin A.A., Schnorr B., Scheller B. Treatment of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis by a Sirolimus- or Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2019;12:558–566. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.11.040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 30. Wessely R., Blaich B., Belaiba R.S., Merl S., Görlach A., Kastrati A., Schömig A. Comparative characterization of cellular and molecular anti-restenotic profiles of paclitaxel and sirolimus. Implications for local drug delivery. Thromb. Haemost. 2007;97:1003–1012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 31. Concept Medical. Magic Touch PTA. [https://www.conceptmedical.com/magic-touch-pta/](https://www.conceptmedical.com/magic-touch-pta/) 32. MedAlliance. SELUTION SLR. [https://medalliance.com/selution-slr/](https://medalliance.com/selution-slr/) 33. Biotronik. Passeo-18 Lux. [https://www.biotronik.com/en-us/products/peripheral-vascular-interventions/passeo-18-lux](https://www.biotronik.com/en-us/products/peripheral-vascular-interventions/passeo-18-lux) 34. Scheller B., Speck U., Abramjuk C., Böhm M., Nickenig G. Paclitaxel balloon coating: an innovative therapy for coronary artery disease. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2006;95:485–490. doi: 10.1007/s00392-006-0422-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 37. Wessely R., Blaich B., Belaiba R.S., Merl S., Görlach A., Kastrati A., Schömig A. Comparative characterization of cellular and molecular anti-restenotic profiles of paclitaxel and sirolimus. Implications for local drug delivery. Thromb. Haemost. 2007;97:1003–1012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 40. Granada J.F., Kaluza G.L., Raizner A., Nakano M., Waksman R., Kolodgie F.D., Virmani R. Drug-coated balloons for the prevention of vascular restenosis. Circulation. 2010;121:2672–2680. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.936922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 41. Kaluza G.L., Granada J.F., Raizner A., Nakano M., Waksman R., Kolodgie F.D., Virmani R. Drug-coated balloons for the prevention of vascular restenosis. Circulation. 2010;121:2672–2680. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.936922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 42. Tepe G., Zeller T., Schnorr B., Claussen C.D., Tübler T., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Drug-coated balloon for the prevention of restenosis in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease: 12-month results from the PACIFIER trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011;4:620–627. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.963470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 43. Shammas N.W., Shammas G.A., Shammas C.J., Shammas A.N. Atherectomy for peripheral artery disease: a review of current devices and clinical outcomes. Vasc. Health Risk Manag. 2014;10:133–143. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S56647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 45. Zeller T., Beschorner U., Noory E., Krankenberg H., Rastan A., Schwarzwälder U., Sixt S. Orbital atherectomy for the treatment of femoropopliteal lesions: 12-month results from the CONFIRM registry. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2013;20:645–652. doi: 10.1583/13-4330.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 46. Zeller T., Krankenberg H., Rastan A., Schwarzwälder U., Sixt S. Orbital atherectomy for the treatment of femoropopliteal lesions: 12-month results from the CONFIRM registry. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2013;20:645–652. doi: 10.1583/13-4330.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 49. Zeller T., Rastan A., Schwarzwälder U., Sixt S., Krankenberg H. Rotational atherectomy for the treatment of femoropopliteal lesions: 12-month results from the CONFIRM registry. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2013;20:645–652. doi: 10.1583/13-4330.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 52. Zeller T., Rastan A., Schwarzwälder U., Sixt S., Krankenberg H. Rotational atherectomy for the treatment of femoropopliteal lesions: 12-month results from the CONFIRM registry. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2013;20:645–652. doi: 10.1583/13-4330.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 53. Shammas N.W., Shammas G.A., Shammas C.J., Shammas A.N. Atherectomy for peripheral artery disease: a review of current devices and clinical outcomes. Vasc. Health Risk Manag. 2014;10:133–143. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S56647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 55. Ducasse E., et al. Excimer laser atherectomy combined with drug-coated balloon angioplasty for femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis: The INTACT trial. J. Vasc. Surg. 2020;71:1604-1612. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.07.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 58. Shockwave Medical. Disrupt PAD III. [https://shockwavemedical.com/products/disrupt-pad-iii/](https://shockwavemedical.com/products/disrupt-pad-iii/) 60. Soga Y., Iida O., Seki S.I., Kawasaki D., Anzai H., Ando H., Nakama T., Shinozaki N., Kozuki A., Ishihara M., et al. TCD-17187 Japan Investigators. Twenty-Four-Month Safety and Effectiveness of TCD-17187 Drug-Coated Balloon for Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Artery. Cardiovasc. Intervent Radiol. 2024;47:730–740. doi: 10.1007/s00270-024-03747-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 61. Soga Y., Iida O., Seki S.I., Kawasaki D., Anzai H., Ando H., Nakama T., Shinozaki N., Kozuki A., Ishihara M., et al. TCD-17187 Japan Investigators. Twenty-Four-Month Safety and Effectiveness of TCD-17187 Drug-Coated Balloon for Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Artery. Cardiovasc. Intervent Radiol. 2024;47:730–740. doi: 10.1007/s00270-024-03747-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 63. Stavroulakis K., et al. Optical coherence tomography-guided directional atherectomy and drug-coated balloon angioplasty for femoropopliteal artery disease. J. Vasc. Surg. 2020;71:1613-1620. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.07.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 65. Soga Y., Iida O., Seki S.I., Kawasaki D., Anzai H., Ando H., Nakama T., Shinozaki N., Kozuki A., Ishihara M., et al. TCD-17187 Japan Investigators. Twenty-Four-Month Safety and Effectiveness of TCD-17187 Drug-Coated Balloon for Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in Superficial Femoral and Proximal Popliteal Artery. Cardiovasc. Intervent Radiol. 2024;47:730–740. doi: 10.1007/s00270-024-03747-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 66. Tepe G., Zeller T., Schnorr B., Claussen C.D., Tübler T., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Drug-coated balloon for the prevention of restenosis in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease: 12-month results from the PACIFIER trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011;4:620–627. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.963470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 67. Scheller B., Hehrlein C., Bocksch W., Ischinger T., Hadamitzky M., Klauss V., Wohrle J., Wohrle J., Meier B., Reifart N. Two-year follow-up after paclitaxel-eluting balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis of bare-metal stents: the PACIFIER trial. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2012;101:275–282. doi: 10.1007/s00392-011-0397-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 70. Tepe G., Zeller T., Schnorr B., Claussen C.D., Tübler T., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Drug-coated balloon for the prevention of restenosis in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease: 12-month results from the PACIFIER trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011;4:620–627. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.963470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 71. Werk M., Langner S., Zeller T., Majunke N., Handt S., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of femoropopliteal artery disease: 12-month results from the LEVANT 2 trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2012;5:831–839. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.973470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 72. Scheller B., Hehrlein C., Bocksch W., Ischinger T., Hadamitzky M., Klauss V., Wohrle J., Wohrle J., Meier B., Reifart N. Two-year follow-up after paclitaxel-eluting balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis of bare-metal stents: the PACIFIER trial. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2012;101:275–282. doi: 10.1007/s00392-011-0397-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 73. Tepe G., Zeller T., Schnorr B., Claussen C.D., Tübler T., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Drug-coated balloon for the prevention of restenosis in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease: 12-month results from the PACIFIER trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011;4:620–627. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.963470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 74. Tepe G., Zeller T., Schnorr B., Claussen C.D., Tübler T., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Drug-coated balloon for the prevention of restenosis in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease: 12-month results from the PACIFIER trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011;4:620–627. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.963470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 76. Scheller B., Hehrlein C., Bocksch W., Ischinger T., Hadamitzky M., Klauss V., Wohrle J., Wohrle J., Meier B., Reifart N. Two-year follow-up after paclitaxel-eluting balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis of bare-metal stents: the PACIFIER trial. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2012;101:275–282. doi: 10.1007/s00392-011-0397-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 77. Zeller T., Beschorner U., Noory E., Krankenberg H., Rastan A., Schwarzwälder U., Sixt S. Orbital atherectomy for the treatment of femoropopliteal lesions: 12-month results from the CONFIRM registry. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2013;20:645–652. doi: 10.1583/13-4330.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 78. Werk M., Langner S., Zeller T., Majunke N., Handt S., Schmehl J., Duda S.H. Paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of femoropopliteal artery disease: 12-month results from the LEVANT 2 trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2012;5:831–839. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.973470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 79. Zeller T., Beschorner U., Noory E., Krankenberg H., Rastan A., Schwarzwälder U., Sixt S. Orbital atherectomy for the treatment of femoropopliteal lesions: 12-month results from the CONFIRM registry. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2013;20:645–652. doi: 10.1583/13-4330.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 80. Shammas N.W., Shammas G.A., Shammas C.J., Shammas A.N. Atherectomy for peripheral artery disease: a review of current devices and clinical outcomes. Vasc. Health Risk Manag. 2014;10:133–143. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S56647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 82. Tack Device. Philips. [https://www.philips.com/a-w/healthcare/philips-tack-endovascular-system.html](https://www.philips.com/a-w/healthcare/philips-tack-endovascular-system.html) 83. ClinicalTrials.gov. [https://clinicaltrials.gov/](https://clinicaltrials.gov/)