ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2025
Artificial Intelligence in Drug-Coated Cardiovascular Devices: A Narrative Review.
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Functional Vascular Stents for Cardiovascular Therapy with Drug Delivery and Computational Design.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Review
- Beyond the Stent ("Leave-Nothing-Behind") Drug-Coated Balloons in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug-coated cardiovascular devices (DCCDs), including drug-eluting stents (DESs) and drug-coated balloons (DCBs), have significantly advanced interventional cardiology by reducing restenosis and improving long-term outcomes. However, their effectiveness is limited by challenges such as patient-device mismatch, variability in drug delivery kinetics, and dependence on operator experience. Traditional strategies for device selection and performance evaluation are often inadequate to address patient-specific complexities. This narrative review aims to explore how artificial intelligence (AI) can improve the design, deployment, and monitoring of DCCDs, focusing on personalized treatment strategies, regulatory implications, and future innovations in interventional cardiology. A targeted literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science between 2020 and 2025 using keywords such as "artificial intelligence", "drug-eluting stents", "cardiovascular devices", "machine learning", and "intravascular imaging". Studies were included based on their relevance to AI applications in DCCD design, procedural support, or post-procedural monitoring. AI has demonstrated significant potential throughout the DCCD lifecycle. In design, machine learning models enable optimization of drug release kinetics and device geometry. During procedures, AI improves real-time intravascular imaging interpretation and provides guidance for precise device placement. Post-intervention, predictive analyses using patient data can aid in the early detection of complications such as in-stent restenosis. Furthermore, technical, regulatory, and ethical challenges remain, including model validation, data bias, and the need for transparency in decision-making algorithms. AI-driven approaches offer a promising paradigm for advancing cardiovascular device technology toward more adaptable, personalized, and efficient care. Integrating explainable, clinically validated AI systems with DCCDs can improve outcomes, reduce procedural variability, and support value-based care. Future research should prioritize real-time intraoperative feedback systems, adaptive AI models based on longitudinal patient data, and regulatory compliance and fairness strategies.
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.