SynthesisMedicine2017
Drug-coated balloon in combination with bare metal stent strategy for de novo coronary artery disease: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of drug-eluting balloon versus drug-eluting stent for treatment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2018Pooled it
- Differential clinical outcomes in ACS: the amplified risk of diabetes in patients treated with drug-coated balloon angioplasty.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Drug-coated balloons for the treatment of ostial left anterior descending or ostial left circumflex artery lesions: a patient-level propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2023Article
- Stentless at ostium: a novel approach for treating ostial left anterior descending or left circumflex coronary artery lesions with drug-coated balloons.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
- Drug-coated balloon in the treatment of coronary left main true bifurcation lesion: A patient-level propensity-matched analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Drug-Coated Balloon in Coronary Patients with and without Diabetes Mellitus: A Multicenter, Propensity Score Study.Journal of diabetes research · 2021Observational
- Therapeutic effect of irbesartan combined with atorvastatin calcium in the treatment of rats with coronary heart disease.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
- Drug-eluting balloons with provisional bail-out or adjunctive stenting inCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies examining the efficiency of drug-coated balloon (DCB) + bare metal stent (BMS) compared with stents alone for de novo lesions have reported inconsistent results. The present comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed and compared the clinical efficacy and safety of DCB + BMS with those of stents alone for de novo coronary artery disease.
methodsWe formally searched electronic databases before September 2016 to identify potential studies. All RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they compared DCB + BMS with a control treatment (drug-eluting stent [DES] alone or BMS alone) in patients with de novo coronary artery disease.
resultsEleven RCTs with a total of 2196 patients met the inclusion criteria were included in our meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis indicated DCB plus BMS was associated with poorer outcomes when compared with DES alone in primary endpoint {(in-segment late lumen loss [LLL]: mean difference [MD], 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.32; P = 0.0042) and (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACEs]: risk ratio [RR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.44-2.45; P < 0.0001)}. However, DCB + BMS had nonsignificantly lower LLL than BMS alone (in-segment LLL: MD, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.33-0.04; P = 0.24), and was more advantageous in reducing MACE incidence, with borderline significance (MACEs: RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.99; P = 0.05).
conclusionsIn summary, the present results do not favor the DCB + BMS strategy as an alternative therapeutic method to DES implantation for de novo coronary artery lesions in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Additional well-designed large RCTs with long-follow-up periods are required to clarify the inconsistent results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.