ArticleEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2024
Biological differences of three paclitaxel- and sirolimus-coated balloons on coronary lesions in a rabbit model.
Article in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06373601 (Selution Sirolimus Coated Balloon), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Selution Sirolimus Coated Balloon (MedAlliance) Versus SeQuent Please Neo Paclitaxel Coated Balloon (Bbraun) for the Treatment of de Novo Coronary Artery Lesions in Medium-small Size Vessels.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A meta-analysis of the efficacy of limus-coated balloons vs. paclitaxel-coated balloons for coronary artery disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- 2026 revised CVIT clinical expert consensus on drug coated balloons for coronary artery disease.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Comparative analysis of biologic drug effects and distal particulate embolization among three drug-coated balloons: a histological and biological study in a rabbit model.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Article
- What do we need to maximise the effect of drug-coated balloons? An Asian perspective.AsiaIntervention · 2025Article
- Enhanced Drug Effect With Cutting Balloon Followed by Drug Coated Balloon in a Rabbit Model.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Sirolimus coated balloons in peripheral arterial disease, what's next?Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Article
- The best devices for superficial femoral artery, with "limited" cases and vessel preparations.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- Reply: Biological differences of three paclitaxel- and sirolimus-coated balloons on coronary lesions in a rabbit model.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Letter: Biological differences of three paclitaxel- and sirolimus-coated balloons on coronary lesions in a rabbit model.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Comparative preclinical assessment of drug-coated balloons: a blessing and a curse for clinical translation.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug-coated balloons (DCBs) are important treatment options for coronary artery disease; however, randomised controlled trials comparing various DCB technologies are sparse, and further investigations are needed.
aimsThis preclinical study aimed to histologically and biologically compare the drug effects and safety of a low-dose paclitaxel-coated DCB (PCB; AGENT), a regular-dose PCB (SeQuent Please NEO) and a sirolimus-coated DCB (SCB; MagicTouch).
methodsThe DCBs were inflated in the healthy iliac arteries of 18 rabbits, which were euthanised after 28 days. The treated iliac arteries and distal skeletal muscles were histopathologically evaluated, and drug concentrations were measured.
resultsIn the histopathological evaluation, the medial smooth muscle cell loss score regarding depth, an indicator of drug efficacy, was significantly higher with AGENT and SeQuent Please NEO than with MagicTouch (4.0 [3.6-4.0] vs 3.7 [3.7-4.0] vs 2.2 [2.0-2.4]), with significant differences in comparisons between AGENT and MagicTouch (p<0.01) and between SeQuent Please NEO and MagicTouch (p<0.01). AGENT and SeQuent Please NEO showed comparable drug concentrations in the treated artery (p=0.61). In contrast, the drug concentrations in distal skeletal muscles were the highest for MagicTouch, followed by SeQuent Please NEO and AGENT (28.07 [13.19-52.46] ng/mg vs 0.66 [0.22-3.76] ng/mg vs 0.25 [0.04-3.23] ng/mg, respectively).
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that PCBs might have higher efficacy and lower drug concentrations in distal skeletal muscles than the MagicTouch SCB. The efficacy of the AGENT low-dose PCB and the SeQuent Please NEO regular-dose PCB was comparable.
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.