Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Real-World Usage of a Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon With Urea Compared With Other Contemporary Drug-Coated Balloons: A 2-Year Analysis From SCAAR in Over 6000 Patients.
Observational study in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Paclitaxel Noninferior to Paclitaxel: Registry-Scale Evidence for an Urea-Excipient Drug-Coated Balloon in a Real World Population: A Commentary on the SCAAR Nationwide Comparative Registry Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug-coated balloons (DCB) are frequently used during percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite this there are limited data from studies comparing different types of DCB, particularly for a paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) using urea as the excipient. This study aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of the PCB with urea compared with other frequently used DCB, attempting to emulate a target trial using observational data.
methodsSCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry) is a nationwide registry including data on all patients in Sweden undergoing coronary angiography. For this study, all procedures with DCB in Sweden between August 2021 and May 2024 were included. Propensity score weighted multivariable Cox regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to assess outcomes through 2 years.
resultsA total of 1797 (27.7%) procedures with the PCB with urea and 4691 (72.3%) procedures with Other DCB were eligible for this analysis. DCB treatment was performed in a variety of patients and lesions including 32.4% diabetes, 64.2% acute coronary syndrome, 20.5% bifurcations and 33.0% in-stent restenosis. After 2 years, the event rates for the PCB with urea and Other DCB were 16.4% versus 18.4% for major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR] 1.01 [95% CI 0.84-1.22]), 7.2% versus 8.2% for all-cause mortality (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.80-1.39]), 6.1% versus 8.0% for myocardial infarction (HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.59-1.11]), 14.6% versus 14.9% for new revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (HR 1.02 [95% CI 0.83-1.25]), 0.8% versus 1.3% for target lesion definite thrombosis (HR 0.93 [95% CI 0.41-2.11]), 7.4% versus 8.7% for target lesion revascularization (HR 0.95 [95% CI 0.70-1.29]), and 10.5% versus 11.3% for target vessel revascularization (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.76-1.29]).
conclusionsIn this analysis evaluating 2-year clinical outcomes after DCB, in a broad patient population, the PCB with urea had comparable outcomes with other contemporary DCB. This data further support the safety and efficacy of the PCB with urea.
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.