Next Article in Journal
Network Diversity and Health Change among International Migrants in China: Evidence from Foreigners in Changchun
Next Article in Special Issue
Bentall Operation: Early Surgical Results, Seven-Year Outcomes, and Risk Factors Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
The Effects and Costs of Personalized Budgets for People with Disabilities: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Circadian Variations and Associated Factors in Patients with Ischaemic Heart Disease
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study

1
Department of Cardiology, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow 226003, India
2
Department of Cardiology and Cardio Lab, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(23), 16231; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192316231
Submission received: 23 July 2022 / Revised: 22 November 2022 / Accepted: 30 November 2022 / Published: 4 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Myocardial Infarction: Prevention and Treatment)

Abstract

:
The present study sought to assess the clinical outcomes of the Mozec™ Non-compliant (NC) Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter (BDC) (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Vapi, India) for dilatation of coronary lesions. This was a post-marketing, single-centre, single-arm, retrospective study. In total, 57 patients who had undergone post-dilatation with the Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter were evaluated. The primary endpoint was procedural success defined as (i) successful delivery of the investigational device to and across the target lesion; (ii) successful inflation, deflation, and withdrawal of the investigational device; (iii) absence of vessel perforation, flow-limiting vessel dissection, increase in thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow from baseline, clinically significant arrhythmia requiring medical treatment; and (iv) achievement of final TIMI flow grade 3 after percutaneous coronary intervention of the target lesion after single or multiple attempts to cross the target lesion. Procedural success was achieved in 57 (100%) patients. There were no incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE)/target lesion failure (TLF). Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter has demonstrated favourable outcomes for the dilatation of routine and complex coronary lesions in a small cohort, as evidenced by its 100% procedural success rate and absence of MACE.

1. Introduction

Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA)—the legacy of Andreas Grüntzig—began more than four decades ago. Balloon catheters were the first devices pioneered to re-open occluded atherosclerotic coronary arteries and have since paved the way for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with the implantation of drug-eluting stents [1]. Nonetheless, balloon catheters remain the primary workhorse device in such interventions and are still adequately employed for both pre- and post-dilatation of atherosclerotic lesions [2].
Over the years, compliant balloon catheters have gradually evolved into semi-compliant (SC), non-compliant (NC), super high-pressure, cutting/scoring and micro or miniature balloons whilst, catheters have been designed to be more steerable and allow system exchange. The compliance of a balloon catheter primarily depends on the increased diameter that results from a predetermined increase in inflation pressure [3]. SC balloons respond to an increase in inflation pressure and are only partially able to conquer the significant lesion resistance [4,5]. In contrast, NC balloons expand uniformly and typically cannot be expanded beyond a predetermined diameter limit [6]. Thus, NC balloons provide an additional benefit of deforming in a more controlled and stable manner during inflation [5,6,7].
In recent years, these NC balloons have been used for pre-dilatation in cases of rigid calcified lesions prior to stenting and post-dilatation of the implanted stent for optimization of stent parameters, bifurcation treatment by kissing balloon technique [8] or treatment of restenosis [9]. In comparison to SC balloons, NC balloons exhibit more consistent outcomes. Further, when dilating a resistant lesion, applying pressure over the permissible threshold exacerbates the probability of non-uniform balloon expansion, leading to over-dilatation of the lesion margins (termed as “dog-boning”) and thereby increases the risk of vascular damage and likelihood of restenosis [6,10]. Nevertheless, despite attaining optimal stent expansion and a significant outcome, several post-dilation studies have been unable to show distinct long-term advantages of both types of balloons. Considering these all aspects, research into the innovative balloon dilatation catheter is worthwhile in order to obtain the best stent expansion and the largest possible luminal area particularly in complex lesion subset.
Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter (BDC) (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Vapi, India) is a sterile single rapid exchange catheter specifically designed for post-dilatation. It consists of a folded NC balloon, a soft tip, a distal shaft of two lumens, and a proximal shaft with single lumen; used for dilatation of the stenotic portion of a coronary artery or a bypass graft stenosis in order to improve myocardial perfusion and post-delivery expansion of balloon-expandable stents. Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in May 2017. The objective of the present study was to assess the clinical outcomes of the Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC for dilatation of coronary lesions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Patient Population

This was a post-marketing, single-centre, single-arm, retrospective study carried out at the Department of Cardiology, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. A total of 57 patients above the age of 18 years who required dilatation of stenosis in coronary artery or a bypass graft using the Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC were enrolled in the study. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of King George’s Medical University (ECR/262/Inst/UP/2013/RR-16). The study design and procedures conformed to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki [11] and the ICH-GCP guidelines [12]. All study patients provided written informed consent to undergo the procedure and for their data to be used for clinical research.

2.2. Study Device

The Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC is a non-compliant, rapid exchange PTCA BDC that is specifically designed to dilate stenotic lesions of a coronary artery or graft and to expand balloon-expandable stents post implantation. Its nylon construction and the soft tip of the catheter facilitates access of the catheter through the stenotic lesion. In order to place the balloon precisely under fluoroscopy, the radiopaque marker band of the balloon indicates the approximate balloon operating length at nominal pressure. The coaxial lumens permit both movement of the guidewire (5F) as well as balloon inflation. Two markers on the proximal shaft indicate the catheter position in relation to the brachial (90 cm) or femoral (100 cm) guiding catheter tip. The proximal portion of the shaft is made up of a polytetrafluoroethylene coating. The 0.019″ distal tip entry facilitates access into the constrictive lesions. This balloon is available in lengths ranging 8–38 mm and diameters ranging 2.00–5.00 mm. The Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter is illustrated in Figure 1.

2.3. Interventional Procedure and Concomitant Medications

According to standard ACC/AHA guidelines, PTCA procedure was performed [13,14]. All procedures were performed via the 6F guiding catheter and the radial access or femoral access point was preferred, as required. Pre-operatively, post-operatively, and on follow-up, all patients were received a standard antiplatelet regimen (aspirin 150 mg daily and clopidogrel 75 mg daily). The use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors was left to the operator’s discretion. All serious adverse events (SAE) were reported to the regulatory bodies as per guidelines.

2.4. Study Endpoints and Study Definitions

The primary endpoint was procedural success, defined as (i) successful delivery of the investigational device to and across the target lesion; (ii) successful inflation, deflation, and withdrawal of the investigational device; (iii) absence of vessel perforation, flow-limiting vessel dissection, improvement of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow from baseline, or clinically significant arrhythmia requiring medical treatment; and (iv) achievement of final TIMI flow grade 3 after PCI of the target lesion following single or multiple attempts to cross the target lesion [15]. Secondary endpoints were: (i) in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE); (ii) target lesion failure (TLF); (iii) cardiac death and non-cardiac death; (iv) stent thrombosis (ST); (v) target vessel revascularization (TVR) not derived from ST; (vi) significant vessel dissection; (vii) device-related death; (viii) device-related death and myocardial infarction (MI); (ix) total procedure time; (x) number of attempts to cross the lesion, and inflation/deflation cycles for the balloon. In-hospital MACE was defined as a composite of TVR, cardiac death, and MI (Q-wave and non-Q-wave). In-hospital TLF was defined as a composite of target lesion revascularization.

2.5. Data Collection

All demographic, lesion, procedural, and outcome data were collected from hospital records and retrospectively extrapolated for the current analysis. Clinical events occurring during the procedure, post-procedure, during hospitalization, and at follow-up were documented.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Categorical variables are presented as numbers and percentages and were compared using Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Continuous variables are represented as mean ± SD and compared using t-test or Mann–Whitney test, as appropriate. A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All data were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 26.0, Inc., IBM, Chicago, IL, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Baseline and Demographic Characteristics

The mean age of the study population was 55.1 ± 11.5 years. Males contributed 44 (77.2%) patients of the study population. Comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes mellitus were present in 18 (31.6%) and 13 (22.8%) patients, respectively. Moreover, seven (12.3%) patients had a history of MI, and one (1.8%) patient had previously undergone PCI, respectively. The baseline and demographic characteristics of the study population are outlined in Table 1.

3.2. Lesion and Procedural Characteristics

The Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter was used to treat 57 of 140 lesions. The characteristics of the lesions comprised bifurcation (33%), LMCA (9%), calcified lesions (18%), tortuous lesion (12%) and Chronic Total Occlusion (CTO, 7%). A total of 10 (17.5%) lesions were total occlusions, the rest 6 being acute occlusions. Left anterior descending artery was most-commonly treated (39%) artery followed by right coronary artery (32%).
In most cases, patients presented with lesions of moderate complexity (type B1–45.7%, type B2–30.7%). Pre- and post-dilatation were performed in 57 (100%) lesions. Mean balloon length and diameter were 12.5 ± 2.4 mm and 2.8 ± 0.5 mm, respectively. Lesions were classified according to American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) lesion morphology criteria [15]. The lesion and procedural characteristics are detailed in Table 2 and Figure 2. The details of the stent employed, pre-dilatation and post-dilatation balloon lengths and sizes are depicted in Table 3.

3.3. Outcomes

Procedural success was achieved in 100% of patients. The flexibility, pushability, trackability, crossability, and deliverability of the balloon were all determined to be satisfactory, therefore the investigators did not encounter issues during inflation, deflation, or withdrawal.
There were no cases of MACE and TLF post procedure. Post-procedure TIMI flow grade 3 was achieved in 98.3% patients as illustrated in Figure 3. No significant serious adverse events have been reported until 10.40 ± 0.26 months follow-up period.

4. Discussion

This was a retrospective, single-centre study, in which the primary endpoint i.e., procedural success—was achieved in all the patients, in whom PTCA was performed using the study device (57 of 140 patients). Regarding the safety and efficacy of Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC, the authors believe that these early results are significant, considering the high degree of vessel complexity observed, including bifurcation, calcified, and tortuous lesions and CTOs. The procedural success attained in terms of re-establishment of myocardial perfusion to TIMI flow grade 3 in a maximum proportion of patients, absence of MACE events, and the absence of post-procedural TLF are the most key findings of this study. Furthermore, neither MACE nor TLF had occurred through the 10.40 ± 0.26 months follow-up period, which establish a basis for the early clinical safety of this device.
Several studies support that post-dilatation with NC balloons following stent deployment can enhance stent expansion and perhaps reduce the incidences of TVR and ST [16]. The Pre-NC and OPRENBIS proof-of-concept studies [2] included a pooled analysis of optical coherence tomography data that revealed pre-dilatation stent expansion indexes (SIEs) of 0.88 ± 0.13 and 0.85 ± 0.14 in the NC and the SC balloon groups (p = 0.018), respectively. After post-dilatation, these SEIs improved to 0.94 ± 0.13 in the NC balloon group and 0.88 ± 0.13 in the SC balloon group (p = 0.02) [2]. Furthermore, a comparative study by Özel et al. examined the peri-procedural efficacy and long-term outcomes of NC and compliant balloons employed for pre-dilatation prior to stent implantation. The study revealed that pre-dilatation with the NC balloon not only eliminated the requirement for post-dilatation, but it decreased the time needed for procedures, fluoroscopy, and contrast volume as well [17].
The STent OPtimization (STOP) study [18] reported that post-dilatation with an NC balloon remarkably improved the stent optimization from 21% to 54% following implantation under intravascular ultrasound guidance. The POSTDIL-STEM trial also found that post-dilatation during primary PCI for ST-elevation MI enhanced the stent expansion, apposition, and post-PCI fractional flow reserve without having a significant impact on the coronary microcirculation [19]. Furthermore, post-dilatation with an NC balloon is necessary to achieve optimal expansion while effectively minimizing malposition [20].
Overall, the data from the aforementioned investigations show positive outcomes when employing NC balloon dilatation catheters and fortify the present study’s findings. In a recent first-in-man study, the safety and efficacy of the novel Balton NC balloon catheter (Balton, Poland) was examined, which reported a procedural success rate of 100% [7]. These findings are in good agreement with the outcomes of current study demonstrating 100% procedural success using the Mozec™ Rx NC PTCA BDC. It was noteworthy that the patient population of that study had 47.6% lesions in the left circumflex artery, 19.1% lesions were of type B2/C category, and multi-vessel disease was present in 61.9% patients. In this study, the majority of patients had moderately complicated lesions (type B1–45.7%, type B2–30.7%), while high-risk lesions were less common (type C–15.7%).
A high frequency of cases of coronary artery disease are encountered in the real-world scenario, in which and PCI is considered suitable for undergoing PCI and may present with acute coronary syndrome that necessitates immediate intervention in the critical coronaries. In such a scenario, these data ascertain the advantages of using the Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC for a vast and vulnerable patient population. Moreover, such encouraging data offer interventional cardiologists a suitable treatment device that has the potential to prevent stent under-expansion, and consequentially in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis.
In a pertinent case series on chronic coronary syndrome patients, Włodarczak et al. detected several undilatable lesions in the left circumflex and left anterior descending arteries [21]. The authors noted that the lesions encountered in their patients were severely undilatable for routine PCI, which necessitated rotational atherectomy in combination with lithotripsy before the post-dilatation was performed with high-pressure inflation using the 20 atm NC balloon Emerge (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA). The findings of this case-series highlight that the degree and severity of atherosclerotic plaque are crucial factors for the success of post-dilatation using NC balloons.
The number of patients undergoing PCI has increased massively, especially as the prevalence of CAD rises in developing countries including India [22]. Such an increasing prevalence raises the health economic burden associated with CAD. In the current scenario, more cost-effective devices would aid to control the individual patient health care costs in countries such as India where healthcare needs are majorly met by out-of-pocket expenditure [23]. The Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC is one such cost-effective device that can reduce the economic burden on patients undergoing PCI. National health insurance schemes have even included this device. This inclusion is supported by the affordable cost and equivalent efficacy in comparison to other more expensive competitor devices on the market. Table 4 compares the features of contemporary NC balloons that are widely used in the routine clinical settings [24,25,26,27,28,29].

Study Limitations

There are a few limitations of the present study that should be mentioned. The retrospective, single-arm study design without a control group is the first limitation of the present study. A study comprising a larger sample size would be better able to provide insightful clinical information. The second limitation was the short follow-up duration. Thirdly, this study comprised a small cohort of complex lesion patient population. Moreover, periprocedural MI and number of attempts were not analysed and were other shortcomings of this study. Lastly, the underutilization of intracoronary imaging guidance is yet another study limitation.

5. Conclusions

The Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC demonstrated favourable outcomes for the dilatation of both simple as well as complex coronary lesions. The achievement of final TIMI flow grade 3 following PCI and an acceptable device success rate demonstrates the efficacy of Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA BDC. The follow-up data further confirm the safety of balloon catheter in this small cohort study, since there were no incidences of MACE and TLF.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.P. and M.A.P.; methodology, A.P., M.A.P., S.D. and V.N.; formal analysis, G.C., S.C. and R.S.; investigation A.P., P.V., M.B. and A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P.; writing—review and editing, all authors. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of King George’s Medical University (ECR/262/Inst/UP/2013/RR-16).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Barton, M.; Grüntzig, J.; Husmann, M.; Rösch, J. Balloon angioplasty—The legacy of Andreas Grüntzig, M.D. (1939–1985). Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2014, 1, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cuculi, F.; Bossard, M.; Zasada, W.; Moccetti, F.; Voskuil, M.; Wolfrum, M.; Malinowski, K.P.; Toggweiler, S.; Kobza, R. Performing percutaneous coronary interventions with predilatation using non-compliant balloons at high-pressure versus conventional semi-compliant balloons: Insights from two randomised studies using optical coherence tomography. Open Heart 2020, 7, e001204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Safian, R.D.; Hoffmann, M.A.; Almany, S.; Kahn, J.; Reddy, V.; Marsalese, D.; Gangadharan, V.; Ajluni, S.; Friedman, H.Z.; Schreiber, T.L.; et al. Comparison of coronary angioplasty with compliant and non-compliant balloons (the angioplasty compliance trial). Am. J. Cardiol. 1995, 76, 518–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Keeble, T.R.; Khokhar, A.; Akhtar, M.M.; Mathur, A.; Weerackody, R.; Kennon, S. Percutaneous balloon aortic valvuloplasty in the era of transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A narrative review. Open Heart 2016, 3, e000421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Mach, M.; Szalkiewicz, P.; Poschner, T.; Hasan, W.; Andreas, M.; Winkler, B.; Hasimbegovic, E.; Steinkellner, T.; Strouhal, A.; Adlbrecht, C.; et al. The use of semi-compliant versus non-compliant balloon systems for predilatation during the implantation of self-expandable transcatheter aortic valves. Eur. J. Clin. Investig. 2021, 51, e13570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Secco, G.G.; Ghione, M.; Mattesini, A.; Dall’Ara, G.; Ghilencea, L.; Kilickesmez, K.; De Luca, G.; Fattori, R.; Parisi, R.; Marino, P.N.; et al. Very high-pressure dilatation for undilatable coronary lesions: Indications and results with a new dedicated balloon. EuroIntervention 2016, 12, 359–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Bil, J.; Pawłowski, T.; Gil, R.J. Short-term results of the First-in-Man new Non-Complaint Balloon Catheter clinical study. Kardiol. Inwazyjna 2018, 13, 4–9. [Google Scholar]
  8. Foin, N.; Secco, G.G.; Ghilencea, L.; Krams, R.; Di Mario, C. Final proximal post-dilatation is necessary after kissing balloon in bifurcation stenting. EuroIntervention 2011, 7, 597–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tanaka, A.; Jabbour, R.J.; Kawamoto, H.; Latib, A.; Colombo, A. A super high-pressure balloon solution for a non-dilatable in-stent restenosis. Int. J. Cardiol. 2016, 203, 357–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Secco, G.G.; Buettner, A.; Parisi, R.; Pistis, G.; Vercellino, M.; Audo, A.; Kambis, M.; Garbo, R.; Porto, I.; Tarantini, G.; et al. Clinical Experience with Very High-Pressure Dilatation for Resistant Coronary Lesions. Cardiovasc. Revascularization Med. 2019, 20, 1083–1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. General Assembly of the World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. J. Am. Coll. Dent. 2014, 81, 14–18. [Google Scholar]
  12. Dixon, J.R., Jr. The International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guideline. Qual. Assur. 1998, 6, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Levine, G.N.; Bates, E.R.; Bittl, J.A.; Brindis, R.G.; Fihn, S.D.; Fleisher, L.A.; Granger, C.B.; Lange, R.A.; Mack, M.J.; Mauri, L.; et al. ACC/AHA Guideline focused update on duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2016, 68, 1082–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Lawton, J.S.; Tamis-Holland, J.E.; Bangalore, S.; Bates, E.R.; Beckie, T.M.; Bischoff, J.M.; Bittl, J.A.; Cohen, M.G.; Dimaio, J.M.; Don, C.W.; et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2022, 145, e18–e114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Kandzari, D.E.; Teirstein, P.S.; Kereiakes, D.J.; Cannon, L.A.; Hearne, S.E.; Kuo, H.C.; Ying, S.W.; Cheong, W.F.; Popma, J.J. Procedural effectiveness of a novel 1.20 mm diameter angioplasty catheter: Clinical and angiographic outcomes. J. Interv. Cardiol. 2013, 26, 131–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Seth, A.; Gupta, S.; Singh, V.P.; Kumar, V. Expert Opinion: Optimising Stent Deployment in Contemporary Practice: The Role of Intracoronary Imaging and Non-compliant Balloons. Interv. Cardiol. 2017, 12, 81–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Özel, E.; Taştan, A.; Öztürk, A.; Özcan, E.E.; Uyar, S.; Şenarslan, Ö. What is better for predilatation in bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: A non-compliant or a compliant balloon? Anatol. J. Cardiol. 2016, 16, 244–249. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rana, O.; Shah, N.C.; Wilson, S.; Swallow, R.; O’Kane, P.; Levy, T. The impact of routine and intravascular ultrasound-guided high-pressure postdilatation after drug-eluting stent deployment: The STent OPtimization (STOP) study. J. Invasive Cardiol. 2014, 26, 640–646. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  19. Karamasis, G.V.; Kalogeropoulos, A.S.; Gamma, R.A.; Clesham, G.J.; Marco, V.; Tang, K.H.; Jagathesan, R.; Sayer, J.W.; Robinson, N.M.; Kabir, A.; et al. Effects of stent postdilatation during primary PCI for STEMI: Insights from coronary physiology and optical coherence tomography. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2021, 97, 1309–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Blachutzik, F.; Achenbach, S.; Tröbs, M.; Marwan, M.; Weissner, M.; Nef, H.; Schlundt, C. Effect of non-compliant balloon postdilatation on magnesium-based bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2019, 93, 202–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Włodarczak, A.; Rola, P.; Barycki, M.; Kulczycki, J.J.; Szudrowicz, M.; Lesiak, M.; Doroszko, A. Rota-Lithotripsy’A Novel Bail-Out Strategy for Calcified Coronary Lesions in Acute Coronary Syndrome. The First-in-Man Experience. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 1872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Mendis, S.; Puska, P.; Norrving, B. Global Atlas on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Control; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011; Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44701 (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  23. Thomson, V.S.; Varghese, M.J.; Chacko, S.T.; Varghese, L.; Alex, A.G.; George, P.V.; George, O.K.; Joseph, G.; Yadav, B.K.; John, J. Coronary artery disease management and cost implications with fractional flow reserve guided coronary intervention in Indian patients with stable ischemic coronary artery disease. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2021, 97, 815–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Biotronik. Pantera LEO. Available online: https://biotronik.cdn.mediamid.com/cdn_bio_doc/bio23105/8615/bio23105.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2022).
  25. Abbott. NC Trek™ Coronary Dilatation Catheter. 2022. Available online: https://www.cardiovascular.abbott/int/en/hcp/products/percutaneous-coronary-intervention/coronary-dilatation-catheters/nc-trek-coronary-dilatation-catheters.html (accessed on 26 April 2022).
  26. Boston Scientific NC EMERGE™ PTCA Dilatation Catheter. Available online: https://www.bostonscientific.com/en-IN/products/catheters-balloon/nc-emerge-balloon-catheter/performance-overview.html (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  27. Gil, R.J.; Pawlowski, T.; Bil, J. Feasibility and safety of the new coronary noncompliant balloon catheter River NC®. Futur. Cardiol. 2021, 17, 1123–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Abbott. Trek™ & Mini Trek™ Coronary Dilatation Catheters. 2022. Available online: https://www.cardiovascular.abbott/us/en/hcp/products/percutaneous-coronary-intervention/coronary-dilatation-catheters/trek-mini-coronary-dilatation-catheter.html (accessed on 26 April 2022).
  29. Medtronic. NC Sprinter Rx Noncompliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter. 2022. Available online: https://www.medtronic.com/ca-en/healthcare-professionals/products/cardiovascular/catheters/balloon-catheters/nc-sprinter-rx-noncompliant-balloon-dilatation-catheter.html (accessed on 26 April 2022).
Figure 1. Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter.
Figure 1. Mozec™ NC Rx PTCA balloon dilatation catheter.
Ijerph 19 16231 g001
Figure 2. Lesion classification according to the modified American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification.
Figure 2. Lesion classification according to the modified American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification.
Ijerph 19 16231 g002
Figure 3. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow pre- and post-procedure.
Figure 3. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow pre- and post-procedure.
Ijerph 19 16231 g003
Table 1. Baseline and demographic characteristics.
Table 1. Baseline and demographic characteristics.
Baseline CharacteristicsPatients
n = 57
Age, years55.1 ± 11.5
Males44 (77.2%)
Heart rate, beats per min77.9 ± 14.9
Systolic blood pressure, mmHg121.1 ± 18.0
Diastolic blood pressure, mmHg73.3 ± 17.0
Medical History
Hypertension18 (31.6%)
Diabetes mellitus13 (22.8%)
Smoking3 (5.26%)
Dyslipidaemia2 (3.5%)
Diagnosis at Presentation
Stable angina
20 (35.1%)
Acute coronary syndrome37 (64.9%)
ST-elevation MI17 (46)
Non-ST-elevation MI15 (40.5)
Unstable angina5 (13.5)
Single vessel disease 11 (20)
Dual vessel disease23 (40)
Multivessel disease23 (40)
  Previous coronary artery bypass graft0 (0%)
  Previous myocardial infarction7 (12.3%)
  Previous percutaneous coronary intervention1 (1.8%)
All data are expressed as number (percentage) or mean ± standard deviation.
Table 2. Lesion characteristics.
Table 2. Lesion characteristics.
Clinical CharacteristicsPatients
n = 57
Lesion details
 Total number of lesions140
 Total number of lesions treated57
 Number of lesions per patient2.46
 Percentage diameter stenosis86.0 ± 15.0
 Pre-dilatation57 (100)
 Post-dilatation57 (100)
Lesion features
 Bifurcation19 (33.33)
 Calcified10 (17.5)
 Tortuosity7 (12.3)
 Chronic total occlusion4 (7)
Lesion locations
 Left main coronary artery5 (9)
 Left anterior descending artery22 (38.6)
 Left circumflex artery10 (17.5)
 Right coronary artery18 (31.6)
 Ramus intermedius06 (10.5)
Procedural details
 Procedural success57 (100)
 Post Mozec™ NC Rx balloon TIMI III flow56 (98.3)
 Major adverse cardiac event0 (0.0%)
 Target lesion failure0 (0.0%)
All data are expressed as number (percentage) or mean ± standard deviation.
Table 3. Stent, pre-dilatation and post-dilatation balloon specifications.
Table 3. Stent, pre-dilatation and post-dilatation balloon specifications.
Parametern (%)
Total stents86 (100)
Stent per patient1.5
DES, n (%)85 (98.8)
  Everolimus-eluting stent47 (56)
  Sirolimus-eluting stent28 (33)
  Zotarolimus-eluting stent9 (11)
BMS, n (%)1 (1.2)
Balloon details
  Balloon length, mm12.5 ± 2.4
  Balloon diameter, mm2.8 ± 0.5
Post-dilatation balloon
Length, mm, n (%)
  85 (8.77)
  1021 (36.84)
  1316 (28.07)
  1515 (26.32)
Diameter, mm, n (%)
  2.501 (1.75)
  2.759 (15.79)
  3.0024 (42.11)
  3.5021(36.84)
  4.02 (3.51)
All data are expressed as number (percentage) or mean ± standard deviation.
Table 4. Technical comparison of contemporary non-compliant balloon dilatation catheters.
Table 4. Technical comparison of contemporary non-compliant balloon dilatation catheters.
FeaturesPantera LEO
(Biotronik)
[24]
NC Trek Rx
(Abbott) [25]
NC Emerge™
(Boston Scientific Corporation)
[26]
River
(Balton)
[27]
Mini Trek
(Abbott)
[28]
NC Sprinter Rx
(Medtronic)
[29]
Mozec NC
(Meril Life Sciences)
Nominal pressure (atm)141212881012
Rated burst pressure (atm)18 & 201818/2018141820
Guidewire compatibility (inch)0.0140.0140.0140.0140.0140.0160.014
Shaft length (cm)145143142140145138142
Sheath compatibility (F)5-5,655,6-5
Balloon length (mm)8–306–256–3010–406–206–278–38
Balloon diameter (mm)2.00–5.001.50–5.002.00–6.001.25–4.001.20–2.002.00–5.002–5
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pradhan, A.; Vishwakarma, P.; Bhandari, M.; Sethi, R.; Chandra, S.; Chaudhary, G.; Sharma, A.; Perrone, M.A.; Dwivedi, S.; Narain, V. Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 16231. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192316231

AMA Style

Pradhan A, Vishwakarma P, Bhandari M, Sethi R, Chandra S, Chaudhary G, Sharma A, Perrone MA, Dwivedi S, Narain V. Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(23):16231. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192316231

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pradhan, Akshyaya, Pravesh Vishwakarma, Monika Bhandari, Rishi Sethi, Sharad Chandra, Gaurav Chaudhary, Akhil Sharma, Marco Alfonso Perrone, Sudhanshu Dwivedi, and Varun Narain. 2022. "Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 23: 16231. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192316231

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop