Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41813049›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2026

Hybrid drug-coated balloon strategy for coronary bifurcation lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Daimy M M Dillen, Konrad A J van Beek, Amy J E Vermeer, Pieter-Jan Vlaar, Mohamed El Farissi, Jesse P A Demandt, Rob Eerdekens, Marcel van Het Veer, Pim A L Tonino, Koen Teeuwen

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Daimy M M DillenCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands daimy.dillen@catharinaziekenhuis.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-9640-5026
Konrad A J van BeekCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Amy J E VermeerCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Pieter-Jan VlaarCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Mohamed El FarissiCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Jesse P A DemandtCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6506-7108
Rob EerdekensCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Marcel van Het VeerCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Pim A L ToninoCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Koen TeeuwenCardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesRecently, drug-coated balloons (DCB) have emerged as a promising alternative for side branch treatment in coronary bifurcation lesions, in combination with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in the main vessel, the hybrid DCB approach. We aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients treated with the hybrid DCB approach and to compare this strategy with other bifurcation techniques.

designA systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up until January 2025. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and observational studies investigating clinical outcomes in patients treated with the hybrid DCB approach for coronary bifurcation lesions. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. The outcome of interest was the combined endpoint of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) or target lesion revascularisation (TLR) at the longest available follow-up. Crude event rates, stratified by treatment strategy, were provided for the overall incidence of the primary endpoint. Furthermore, we conducted meta-analyses on the combined endpoint, comparing different bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategies. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool.

results13 studies, consisting of 2393 patients, were included in our systematic review. Investigated techniques were the hybrid DCB approach in all studies, and a two-stent strategy or the combination of DES in main vessel and balloon angioplasty (BA) in the side branch as potential comparators. Median follow-up duration was 12 months (IQR 7.5-12). The combined endpoint of cardiac death, MI or TLR was found in 5.6% in the hybrid DCB group, 15.4% in the two-stent group and in 10.0% in the BA group. The pooled analyses, including three and two studies, respectively, showed that the hybrid DCB approach was associated with a lower risk of the composite endpoint of cardiac death, MI or TLR when compared with a two-stent strategy (7.9% vs 15.4%; risk ratio (RR): 0.53; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.85) and compared with BA in the side branch (5.6% vs 10.0%; RR: 0.57; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.88). The certainty of the evidence was graded as very low.

conclusionThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the hybrid DCB approach is a feasible and promising treatment approach for bifurcation lesions, when compared with other bifurcation PCI strategies. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously as the certainty of evidence was graded as very low, underlining the importance of larger trials to confirm these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420250651469.

Indexed as

Angioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCoronary Artery DiseaseDrug-Eluting StentsPercutaneous Coronary InterventionHumansMyocardial InfarctionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeCoronary heart diseaseCoronary interventionIschaemic heart disease

Identifiers

PMID41813049
PMCPMC12983860

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.