SynthesisMedicine2019
Drug-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent in de novo small coronary vessel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 8 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating drug-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent for the treatment of small coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in patients with small coronary artery disease: an updated meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Drug-Coated Balloons for De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.Yonsei medical journal · 2023Pooled it
- Drug-Coated Balloon-Only Strategy for De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention forFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- The comparative short-term efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloon vs. drug-eluting stent for treating small-vessel coronary artery lesions in diabetic patients.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Stent forFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes With Drug-Coated Balloons for De Novo Coronary Lesions: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Pooled it
- Drug-coated balloon: an effective alternative to stent strategy in small-vessel coronary artery disease-a meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Drug-Coated Balloon versus Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients with Small-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Cardiology research and practice · 2021Review
- Drug-Eluting Stents and Balloons-Materials, Structure Designs, and Coating Techniques: A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Long term outcomes of drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in patients with small vessel coronary artery disease.Indian heart journalArticle
- Recent advance in treatment of atherosclerosis: Key targets and plaque-positioned delivery strategies.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug-coated balloon as a novel therapeutic strategy has been used to treat restenosis in cases of bare metal and drug-eluting stents. However, evidence of its safety and efficacy is scarce in de novo small coronary artery vessel disease. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of the drug-coated balloon and the drug-eluting stent.
methodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases were searched for studies published up to October 17, 2018. Studies comparing the drug-coated balloon with the drug-eluting stent strategy in patients with de novo small coronary artery vessel disease (reference diameter, <3 mm) were identified. The clinical outcomes were nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiac death, all-cause death, target lesion revascularization, and target-vessel revascularization. Data were analyzed using the statistical software RevMan (version 5.3). Fixed effects models were performed to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Sensitivity analyses were used to detect potential sources of heterogeneity, while subgroup analyses were implemented to assess the differential effects.
resultsThree randomized controlled trials and 3 nonrandomized controlled studies were identified. Six studies including a total of 1800 patients compared the differences between the drug-coated balloon and the drug-eluting stent strategies in patients with de novo small coronary artery vessel disease. The results indicated that the drug-coated balloon strategy was associated with a significant reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90, P = .02) compared with the drug-eluting stent strategy, while insignificant inter-strategy differences were observed in cardiac death (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73-3.33, P = .25), all-cause death (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25-1.23, P = .15), target lesion revascularization (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73-2.1, P = .43), and target-vessel revascularization (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59-1.52, P = .84).
conclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that the drug-coated balloon strategy is noninferior to the drug-eluting stent strategy, delivering a good outcome in nonfatal myocardial infarction, and can be recommended as an optimal treatment strategy in patients with de novo small coronary artery vessel disease. Larger randomized controlled studies with longer follow-up periods are needed to further confirm the benefits of the drug-coated balloon strategy.
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.