ReviewJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2025
Drug-Coated Balloons: Recent Evidence and Upcoming Novelties.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention strategies for coronary small-vessel disease: a network meta-analysis of randomized trials.Annals of medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Sirolimus-Coated Versus Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Coronary Artery Disease: A Grade Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical pathways in cardiology · 2026Pooled it
- Ultrasound-Guided Distal Radial Artery Recanalization (RETRY Study): Initial Case Series and Early Experience.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Insulin or Dapagliflozin Potentially Improves Microcirculatory Dysfunction or INOCA Related to Culprit Vessels in Diabetic Patients With STEMI After DCB Therapy During Long-Term Follow-Up.Journal of diabetes · 2026Observational
- Innovations in Diagnosis and Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Drug-coated balloons and diabetes: a review.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Review
- DynamX Bioadaptor as an Emerging and Promising Innovation in Interventional Cardiology.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Research status and trends of drug-coated balloons in coronary artery disease: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have emerged as a compelling alternative to drug-eluting stents in the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD), offering the advantage of local drug delivery without permanent vascular scaffold implantation. Initially developed for managing in-stent restenosis, DCBs seem appealing for broader indications, particularly in small vessel disease and bifurcation lesions. While paclitaxel-based DCBs remain the most investigated, newer limus formulations are showing promise and appear to be a valid alternative in early trials. Evidence from recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses highlights DCBs as a safe and effective option in selected patients, with potential benefits including lower restenosis rates, reduced need for dual antiplatelet therapy, and avoidance of late stent-related complications. As new large-scale trials near completion, DCBs are poised to take on a broader role in the treatment of CAD, particularly in patients where "leaving nothing behind" offers a clinical advantage. This review offers an overview of the DCB platforms commercially available, showing pharmacological differences, providing current indications in practical guidelines, and analyzing the most recent and impactful RCTs and meta-analyses in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.