BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an established treatment option for in-stent restenosis and small vessel, de novo, coronary artery disease (CAD). Although the use of this tool is increasing in everyday practice, data regarding performance in the treatment of de novo, large vessel CAD (LV-CAD) is still lacking. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DCB versus drug-eluting stent (DES) in this setting.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases up to January 24, 2024, for studies which compared the efficacy and safety of DCB versus DES in the treatment of de novo lesions in large vessels (≥ 2.5 mm), reporting at least one clinical outcome of interest (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023470417). The analyzed outcomes were cardiovascular death (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), all-cause death (ACD), and late lumen loss (LLL) at follow-up. The effect size was estimated using a random effects model as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: A total of 13 studies (6 randomized controlled trials and 7 observational studies) involving 2888 patients (DCB n = 1334; DES n = 1533) with de novo LV-CAD were included in this meta-analysis following our inclusion criteria. No differences were observed between DCB and DES in terms of CVD (RR 0.49; 95% CI [0.23-1.03]; p = 0.06), MI (RR 0.48; 95% CI [0.16-1.45]; p = 0.89), TLR (RR 0.73; 95% CI [0.40-1.34]; p = 0.32), ACD (RR 0.78; 95% CI [0.57-1.07]; p = 0.12), and LLL (MD - 0.14; 95% CI [- 0.30 to 0.02]; p = 0.10) at follow-up. DES proved a higher mean acute gain versus DCB [1.94 (1.73, 2.14) vs 1.31 (1.02, 1.60); p = 0.0006].
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that DCB PCI might provide a promising option for the management of selected, de novo LV-CAD compared to DES. However, more focused RCTs are needed to further prove the benefits of a \"metal-free\" strategy in this subset of CAD.

BACKGROUND: With advancements in chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) recanalization techniques and concepts, the success rate of recanalization has been steadily increasing. However, the current data are too limited to draw any reliable conclusions about the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis to confirm the efficacy of DCB in CTO PCI.
METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science and Embase from inception to July 25, 2023. The primary outcome was major advent cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The follow-up angiographic endpoints were late lumen enlargement (LLE), reocclusion and restenosis.
RESULTS: Five studies with a total of 511 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Across studies, patients were predominantly male (72.9-85.7%) and over fifty years old. The summary estimate rate of MACE was 13.0% (95% CI 10.1%-15.9%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.428). The summary estimate rates of cardiac death and MI were 2.2% (95% CI 0.7%-3.7%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.873) and 1.2% (95% CI -0.2-2.6%, I2 = 13.7%, p = 0.314), respectively. Finally, the pooled incidences of TLR and TVR were 10.1% (95% CI 5.7%-14.5%, I2 = 51.7%, p = 0.082) and 7.1% (95% CI 3.0%-11.2%, I2 = 57.6%, p = 0.070), respectively. Finally, the summary estimate rates of LLE, reocclusion and restenosis were 59.4% (95% CI 53.5-65.3%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.742), 3.3% (95% CI 1.1-5.4%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.865) and 17.5% (95% CI 12.9-22.0%, I2 = 0%, p = 0.623), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Accordingly, DCB has the potential to be used as a treatment for CTO in suitable patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to explain the current advancements in the treatment modalities for small vessel coronary artery disease (SVCAD) and de novo lesions post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), focusing on drug-coated stents (DES) and drug-coated balloons (DCB). Its goal is to address the lack of standards in the management of these lesions and to assess the potential of DCB as a preferential treatment strategy over DES in the long term. RECENT FINDINGS: Technological advancements have improved drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-coated balloons (DCB) which offer a more promising avenue for managing SVCAD. According to new data, DCBs, initially recognized for their efficacy in preventing restenosis within three to five years of stent placement, may offer superior outcomes compared to DES in certain clinical scenarios. This review shows that DCBs have a favorable therapeutic profile in the treatment of SVCAD, and they could be considered as an alternative to DES. Although the initial data is compelling, definitive conclusions cannot be met without further large-scale, long-term clinical trials. The implication of these findings suggests a shift in the future of SVCAD management and requires additional research to substantiate the long-term benefits of DCB use in SVCAD. Should ongoing and future studies corroborate the current evidence, DCB could emerge as the standard of care for SVCAD, significantly influencing clinical practices and future research.

Since the advent of coronary stents, two of the most common long-term complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are in-stent restenosis (ISR) and stent thrombosis (ST). Although the rates of ST have been nearly abolished and ISR rates have declined with the current gold-standard second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), late ISR of DES remains a valid concern in the field of interventional cardiology. The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a non-stent technology that relies on the concept of targeted homogeneous drug delivery from an inflated balloon to restore luminal vascularity, treat atherosclerosis, and overcome some limitations of PCI, including ISR and prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy to prevent ST by leaving nothing behind. Most clinical evidence on coronary DCBs predominantly comes from small, randomized data and registries using paclitaxel DCBs for ISR and de novo lesions in the coronary space. Since 2014, outside the United States, DCBs have been approved for the treatment of ISR, with a class I recommendation by the European Society of Cardiology. The Food and Drug Administration very recently approved the Agent DCB to treat ISR in patients with coronary artery disease in the US. Additionally, recent randomized clinical data also showed DCB\'s safety and efficacy for the treatment of de novo small-vessel disease and high-bleeding-risk patients, while their role for other clinical situations including acute coronary syndrome, large-vessel disease, bifurcation lesions, and long-diffuse distal lesions is currently under investigation. Herein, we review the evidence-based role of DCBs in the treatment of coronary lesions and offer future perspectives.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: With the development of endovascular therapies, some studies have indicated a therapeutic potential for infrapopliteal arterial revascularization with atherectomy (AT). This study was designed to perform a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of AT combined with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) or drug-coated balloon (DCB) compared with PTA or DCB for infrapopliteal arterial diseases.
METHODS: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles published up to November 2022, reporting using atherectomy devices for infrapopliteal arterial patients. Randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies were included, and clinical characteristic outcomes were extracted and pooled. Then, we analyzed the efficacies of the AT (AT + PTA or DCB) group and the non-AT (DCB or PTA) group for infrapopliteal arterial patients.
RESULTS: We identified 6 studies with 1269 patients included in this meta-analysis. The risk ratios (RRs) of primary patency for patients treated with atherectomy group compared to non-atherectomy group at 6 months was 1.03 (95% confidence intervals (CIs) 0.86-1.23, p = .74), at 12 months was 1.05 (95% CIs 0.84-1.30, p = .66), in the subgroup analysis between AT combined with DCB and DCB alone, the RRs of primary patency was 1.56 (95% CIs 1.02-2.39, p = .04). The RRs of freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 6 months was 1.04 (95% CIs 0.93-1.17, p = .45), at 12 months was 1.20 (95% CIs 0.83-1.75, p = .33). The RRs of mortality at 6 months was 0.57 (95% CIs 0.29-1.11, p = .10), and at 12 months was 0.79 (95% CI 0.50-1.25, p = .31). The RRs of limb salvage at 12 months was 0.99 (95% CIs 0.92-1.07, p = .87). The standardized mean difference (SMD) of (Ankle-brachial index) ABI at 12 months was 0.16 (95% CIs 0.06-0.26, p = .001).
CONCLUSIONS: According to this systematic review and meta-analysis, no significant advantages were found with the addition of atherectomy to balloon angioplasty in the below-the-knee segment. Only in the analysis of a small subgroup of atherectomy + DCB versus DCB alone was the primary patency rate at six months significantly higher when adding atherectomy. No further significant differences were found related to 12 months of primary patency, TLR, limb salvage, and mortality among groups.

UNASSIGNED: In-stent restenosis (ISR) has become a significant obstacle to interventional therapy for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for patients with coronary ISR remains controversial. This network meta-analysis (NMA) was aimed to compare and estimate the effectiveness of different PCI strategies and commercial devices for the treatment of patients with coronary ISR.
UNASSIGNED: In present study, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from database inception to October 20, 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials. We included studies comparing various PCI strategies for the treatment of any type of coronary ISR. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42022364308.
UNASSIGNED: We included 44 eligible trials including 8479 patients, 39 trials comparing the treatment effects of 10 PCIs, and 5 trials comparing the efficacy between different types of drug-eluting stent (DES) or drug-coated balloon (DCB) devices. Among the PCIs, everolimus-eluting stent was the optimal strategy considering target lesion revascularization (TLR), percent diameter stenosis (%DS), and binary restenosis (BR), and sirolimus-coated balloon was the optimal strategy considering late lumen loss (LLL). In the comparison of commercial devices, the combination strategy excimer laser coronary angioplasty plus SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon showed promising therapeutic prospects.
UNASSIGNED: DCB and DES remain the preferred treatment strategies for coronary ISR, considering both the primary clinical outcome (TLR) and the angiographic outcomes (LLL, BR, %DS). Personalized combination interventions including DCB or DES hold promise as a novel potential treatment pattern for coronary ISR.

UNASSIGNED: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a novel approach to avoiding stent-related complications and has proven effective for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and small vessels. However, its role in the treatment of de novo lesions in large vessels is less settled.
UNASSIGNED: To estimate the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloon versus stent in the treatment of de novo lesions in large coronary arteries.
UNASSIGNED: We searched the literature until April 2023. We judged the safety of DCB based on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), cardiac death, all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and bleeding event; and efficacy according to late lumen loss (LLL), minimum lumen diameter (MLD). We conducted subgroup analyses according to stent type and whether urgent PCI was required.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 10 RCTs were included. Overall, LLL (mean difference (MD) = -0.19, 95 % confidence interval (CI): -0.32 to -0.06, P = 0.003) was lower in the DCB group than in the Stent arm. This effect was consistent in subgroup analysis regardless of stent type and disease type. In terms of safety indicators, there were no significant differences between DCB and stent. The subgroup analyses found that safety indicators showed no significant differences between DCB and drug-eluting stent (DES), but TLR was lower in the DCB than in the bare metal stent (BMS). Moreover, in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), safety indicators and LLL showed no significant differences between DCB and DES, but MLD in the DCB was smaller. While in patients with excluded STEMI, MACE and TLR was lower in the DCB compared with the overall stent.
UNASSIGNED: DCB could be a promising alternative for treating de novo lesions in large coronary arteries with satisfactory efficacy and low risk, superior to BMS and not inferior to DES, with a trend toward lower late lumen loss.

OBJECTIVE: Although a number of studies involving small-vessel de novo coronary disease showed clinical benefits of drug-coated balloons (DCB), the role of DCB in large vessel lesions is still unclear.
METHODS: We searched main electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DCB with stents for large vessel de novo coronary artery disease. The primary endpoint was major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), composite cardiovascular death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR).
RESULTS: This study included 7 RCTs with 770 participants. DCB were associated with a marked risk reduction in MACE [Risk Ratio (RR): 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24 to 0.97; P = 0.04], TLR (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.14; P = 0.10), and late lumen loss [standard mean difference (SMD): -0.57; 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.05; P = 0.03] as compared with stents. There is no significant difference in MI (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.21 to 1.54; P = 0.27), CD (RR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.06 to 1.78; P = 0.19), and minimal lumen diameter (SMD: -0.34; 95% CI: -0.72 to 0.05; P = 0.08) between groups. In subgroup analyses, the risk reduction of MACE persisted in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.89; P = 0.03), and patients receiving DCB vs. bare metal stent (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.73; P = 0.01). In addition, there was no significant difference between the DCB group and the drug eluting stent group for MACE (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.60; P = 0.38).
CONCLUSIONS: DCB may be an effective therapeutic option in patients with large vessel de novo coronary artery disease.

Takayasu\'s arteritis (TAK) is a rare chronic granulomatous arteritis that mainly affects the aorta and its major branches. Coronary artery (CA) involvement can be observed in 10-25% of TAK patients. We report a 21-year-old young female who was previously diagnosed with TAK and severe left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis and underwent numerous percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in our hospital due to in-stent restenosis (ISR). This time, an excimer laser coronary atherectomy (ELCA) and drug-coated balloon (DCB) dilation was taken at the LMCA for the ISR. The blood flow was smooth after the operation, and she was symptom-free after discharge. Unfortunately, 5 months later, severe intimal hyperplasia was still seen in the stent of LMCA and left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery. A coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) was performed, and she has been symptom-free ever since. ELCA plus DCB is one of the novel ways we first reported. However, ensuring long-term inflammation control is equally important to restore blood flow. The combination of revascularization and anti-inflammation/immunosuppression is recommended to improve the outcomes of TAK patients with CA involvements.