ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Drug-coated balloons in complex large-vessel coronary artery disease: a comprehensive review of current evidence and future perspectives.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Stent ("Leave-Nothing-Behind") Drug-Coated Balloons in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Drug-coated balloons vs. drug-eluting stents for coronary artery disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with lesion-specific insights.Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are emerging as a valuable alternative to drug-eluting stents (DES) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in the context of complex coronary artery disease (CAD). While DES remain the standard of care in PCI, their use is associated with several well-recognized limitations, including impairment of vascular physiology, inhibition of positive remodeling, and a persistent risk, estimated at approximately 2% per year, of stent-related adverse events, which increases with increasing stent length and anatomical and clinical complexity. DCBs deliver antiproliferative agents without leaving a permanent metallic scaffold, offering the potential to reduce stent burden, preserve native vessel physiology, and shorten the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy. Their efficacy is well established in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and
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.