ReviewHeart international2020
Drug-coated Balloons or Drug-eluting Stents - Determining an Optimum Strategy for Patients with High Bleeding Risk.
Review in Heart international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Year Outcome of Drug Coated Balloon Angioplasty Following Atherectomy for Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Advances in drug-coated balloons for the treatment of coronary artery de novo large-vessel lesions.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Review
- Application of Drug-Coated Balloons in Complex High Risk and Indicated Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
- One-Month Duration Compared with Twelve-Month Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Elective Angioplasty for Coronary Artery Disease: Bleeding and Ischaemic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
he management of patients who require percutaneous coronary intervention and are at high risk of bleeding continues to be challenging; balancing thrombotic risk versus bleeding risk to determine the safest duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). With recent efforts to determine the safety of 1 month of DAPT after implantation of a drug-eluting stent, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have also been explored, as both have been shown superior to bare-metal stents, which have historically been used for patients with high bleeding risk. We sought to review the literature surrounding the safety profile and bleeding events with both DCBs and drug-eluting stents, and conclude that while both offer safety of cessation of DAPT after 1 month, DCBs offer lower major adverse cardiovascular events.
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.