SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2023
Drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 versus drug-eluting stents in patients with in-stent restenosis: An updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Paclitaxel- and Sirolimus-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents in Coronary Artery Disease: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Blended Coronary Revascularization with Drug-Coated Balloon and Drug-Eluting Stent: A Narrative Review on Rationale, Clinical Evidence, and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Consensus Statement on Drug-Coated Balloons in Coronary Artery Disease from the Cardiovascular Intervention Association of Thailand.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Drug-Eluting Stent Use in Percutaneous Coronary Interventions-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Expanding the Role of Drug-Coated Balloons in Contemporary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Start of the Next Revolution or Just One More Weapon in a Growing Arsenal?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Drug-Coated Balloons in All-Comer Population-Are We There Yet?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparative efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in small vessel coronary artery disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2025Review
- Culprit-Lesion Drug-Coated-Balloon Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients Presenting with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI).Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Computational modeling of drug-eluting balloons in peripheral artery disease: Mechanisms, optimization, and translational insights.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Comparative efficacy of drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in treatingThe British journal of cardiology · 2025Article
- Review
- Correction: Drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug-coated balloons (DCBs) are an established strategy for coronary artery disease. However, the new generation drug-eluting stent (DES) is recommended for patients with Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for coronary artery revascularization. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive appraisal of the efficacy of DCBs in patients with AMI undergoing PCI.
methodsWe searched the WOS, PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL till March 2023, for studies that compared DCBs versus DES in patients with AMI undergoing PCI. We used a random-effects model to compare major adverse cardiac events (MACE), cardiac death, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis, Late lumen Loss (LLL), and minimum lumen diameter (MLD) between the two groups.
resultsThirteen studies comprising 2644 patients were included. The pooled OR showed non-inferiority of DCB over DES in terms of MACE (OR = 0.89, 95% CI [0.57 to 1.40], p = 0.63). When we defined MACE as a composite of cardiac death, MI, and TLR; the pooled OR favored DCB over DES (OR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.28 to 0.9], p = 0.02). Moreover, DCB was not inferior to DES in terms of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.8, p = 0.73), cardiac mortality, (OR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.56, p = 0.29), MI (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.34 to 2.29, p = 0.79), stent thrombosis (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.35 to 4.23, p = 0.76), TLR (OR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.93, p = 0.8), LLL (MD = -0.6, 95% CI: -0.3 to 0.19, p = 0.64), or MLD (MD = -0.4, 95% CI: -0.33 to 0.25, p = 0.76).
conclusionOur meta-analysis indicated that DCB intervention was not inferior to DES in the PCI setting in patients with AMI, and can be recommended as a feasible strategy in AMI. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023412757.
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.