SynthesisArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2025
Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons versus Drug-Eluting Stents in Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Small-Vessel Coronary Disease and Drug-Coated Balloons: Time to Reconsider Our Strategy?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug-eluting stents (DES) remain the standard of care for percutaneous coronary intervention in small vessel coronary artery disease (SVD). Paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) have emerged as an alternative, with recent trials suggesting favorable short- and mid-term outcomes, although most were limited by small sample sizes.
objectivesTo compare angiographic and clinical outcomes between DES and PCB in patients with SVD.
methodsSearches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies comparing PCB and DES in SVD, defined as a reference vessel diameter < 3.0 mm. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and results were reported as mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR). Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Heterogeneity was assessed using the chi-square, Tau, and Tau2 tests. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024506502).
resultsA total of 12 studies comprising 17,441 patients (mean age of 58-73 years) were included, with clinical follow-up of 8 to 36 months. All studies evaluated PCB. No significant differences were found between PCB and DES in target lesion revascularization (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.82-1.85; p = 0.30), late lumen loss (MD, -0.09 mm; 95% CI, -0.41 to 0.23; p = 0.57), major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.76-1.33; p = 0.95), all-cause mortality (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.50-1.31; p = 0.39), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.78-3.89; p = 0.17), and myocardial infarction (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.46-1.27; p = 0.30).
conclusionsPCB angioplasty demonstrated clinical and angiographic outcomes comparable to DES in SVD, supporting its role as a safe, effective alternative in selected patients.
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.