Key result
DCB angioplasty shows no benefit over DES for 12-month device-oriented composite endpoints.
Why the study?
Does drug-coated balloon angioplasty reduce the device-oriented composite endpoint compared to drug-eluting stents in adult patients with de novo coronary lesions?
Meta-Analysis (n=7,138)
Does drug-coated balloon angioplasty reduce the device-oriented composite endpoint compared to drug-eluting stents in adult patients with de novo coronary lesions?
Relative Risk: 1.02 (95% CI 0.63–1.64)
p-value: p=0.93
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“The durability of the DCB [drug-coated balloon] performance beyond 12 months remains unresolved and an important question that ongoing trials must address to confirm whether avoidance of permanent implants translates into sustained clinical benefit.”
Drug-coated balloon angioplasty demonstrates comparable 12-month safety and efficacy to modern drug-eluting stents for de novo coronary lesions, offering a potential stent-free strategy.
Background Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has emerged as a potential stent-free strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in de novo coronary artery disease, but robust randomised evidence on safety and efficacy compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) remains limited. Methods We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing DCB angioplasty with DES for de novo coronary lesions in adult patients reporting clinical outcomes at ≥9 months. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to October 2025 without language restriction; trial registries and reference lists were screened manually. Studies limited to in-stent restenosis, bifurcation PCI or observational designs were excluded. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using random-effects models (DerSimonian–Laird method with Hartung–Knapp adjustment). Heterogeneity was assessed with I² and τ² statistics and 95% prediction intervals were reported. Risk of bias was appraised with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Results Seven trials encompassing 7138 patients (DCB 3570; DES 3568) were included. At 12 months, the device-oriented composite endpoint (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularisation) showed no difference between strategies (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.64; p=0.93; I²=52%). Secondary outcomes were comparable: cardiac death (1.26, 0.75 to 2.14), target vessel MI (0.71, 0.36 to 1.39), target lesion revascularisation (1.09, 0.52 to 2.30) and target vessel revascularisation (0.98, 0.58 to 1.65). Sensitivity analysis supported the stability of the primary findings. Trials using sirolimus coated balloons demonstrated similar results. Conclusions DCB angioplasty shows comparable short-term safety and efficacy to modern DES for de novo coronary disease. Long-term follow-up is necessary to confirm whether avoidance of permanent implants translates into clinical benefit. PROSPERO registration number CRD420251175063.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mondragón et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in de novo coronary lesions (n=7,138). Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty vs. Drug-eluting stents (DES) was evaluated on device-oriented composite endpoint (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularisation) (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.64, p=0.93). Drug-coated balloon angioplasty showed no difference compared to drug-eluting stents for the device-oriented composite endpoint at 12 months (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.63-1.64; p=0.93).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: