Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41835989›Full record

ArticleAsiaIntervention2026

Angiographic and functional assessment after paclitaxel or sirolimus drug-coated balloons for de novo coronary artery disease in small vessels: PICCOLETO VI study.

Simone Fezzi, Mauro Gitto, Aurora Trevisanello, Faisal Sharif, Gabriele Venturi, Jacek Bezubka, Sylwia Iwanczyk, Wojciech Wanha, Michał Hawranek, Maksymilian Mielczarek and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AsiaIntervention, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

21 authors.

Simone FezziDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Mauro GittoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Aurora TrevisanelloDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Faisal SharifDepartment of Cardiology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Gabriele VenturiDivision of Cardiology, Mater Salutis Hospital, Legnago, Italy.
Jacek BezubkaDepartment of Cardiology, Sokolowski Hospital, Wałbrzych, Poland.
Sylwia Iwanczyk1st Department of Cardiology, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland.
Wojciech WanhaDepartment of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Michał HawranekDepartment of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Maksymilian Mielczarek1st Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland.
Piotr WańczuraDepartment of Cardiology, Medical College of Sciences, The Rzeszów University, Rzeszów, Poland.
Monica VerdoiaOspedale degli Infermi, Biella, Italy.
Pietro PieriU.O.C. Cardiologia/UTIC ed Emodinamica, Ospedale Cervello, Palermo, Italy.
Antonio MugnoloDivision of Cardiology, Mater Salutis Hospital, Legnago, Italy.
Bharat KhialaniTan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore.
Ilya LitovchikCardiology Department, Shamir Medical Center, Be'er Ya'akov, Israel.
Antoinette MonayerCardiology Department, Shamir Medical Center, Be'er Ya'akov, Israel.
Tuomas T RissanenHeart Center, North Karelia Central Hospital, Siunsote, Joensuu, Finland.
Flavio RibichiniDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Antonio ColomboDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Bernardo CorteseDCB Academy, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) have strong supporting evidence for use in small coronary vessels, while sirolimus-coated balloons (SCB) have shown variable angiographic results, raising questions about their overall effectiveness. Aims: The PICCOLETO VI study aimed to compare the angiographic and physiological outcomes of various PCB and SCB technologies in treating Methods: This international, multicentre study included patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and had elective angiographic follow-up 5-9 months later. Angiographic and physiological assessments were performed by a core laboratory, including Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μFR). Results: Based on a cohort of 293 patients, 227 lesions treated either with a PCB (n=148) or an SCB (n=79) were included. No differences in terms of baseline clinical or angiographic characteristics were reported between the two cohorts. PCB showed lower late lumen loss (-0.05±0.56 mm vs +0.10±0.59 mm; p=0.05) and a higher prevalence of late lumen enlargement (58.1% vs 40.5%; p=0.01). The primary endpoint of late functional loss was not statistically different, with a trend in favour of PCB (-0.01±0.15 vs +0.03±0.13; p=0.09). There was no difference in terms of target lesion failure, with a higher rate of ischaemia-inducing vessels at follow-up in the SCB group (14.9% vs 26.6%; p=0.03). A μFR <=0.86 following drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment emerged as a reliable cutoff for predicting follow-up ischaemia, with an accuracy of 80%, whereas no significant interaction was observed for a post-DCB angiographic degree of stenosis >=30%. Conclusions: In this direct comparison between two classes of DCB, late functional loss was comparable between PCB and SCB, with PCB confirming superior angiographic performance.

Identifiers

PMID41835989
PMCPMC12987396

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.