Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents for Large Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Jinghan Zeng, Yilu Liu, Tianlang Zhao, Jiansong Yuan, Weixian Yang, Man Wang
{"title":"Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents for Large Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Jinghan Zeng, Yilu Liu, Tianlang Zhao, Jiansong Yuan, Weixian Yang, Man Wang","doi":"10.3390/jcdd12090359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of treatments for large vessel coronary artery disease between drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, CNKI, and Wanfang, and selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies which compared drug-coated balloons (DCBs) with drug-eluting stents (DESs). The reference vessel diameter (RVD) should be greater than 2.75 mm. The results of 12 studies with a total of 2634 patients were included in this meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that the DCB group was not inferior to the DES group in terms of the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR). (RR = 1.25, 95% CI: [0.84, 1.85], <i>p</i> = 0.27, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%), and the incidence of bleeding events in the DCB group was lower than that in the DES group (RR = 0.30, 95% CI: [0.15, 0.59], <i>p</i> = 0.0004). The results also showed that the post-intervention minimal lumen diameter (MLD) in the DCB group was smaller than that in the DES group. (RR = -0.37, 95% CI: [-0.59, -0.16], <i>p</i> = 0.0007), but the follow-up MLD in the DCB group was not less than that in the DES group (RR = -0.03, 95% CI: [-0.14,-0.08], <i>p</i> = 0.61). Additionally the DCB group had less late lumen loss (LLL) compared with the DES group. (RR = -0.31, 95% CI: [-0.60, -0.02], <i>p</i> < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis confirms that in the early and late stages after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), DCB is not inferior in efficacy and safety to DES for de novo large coronary lesions with RVD > 2.75 mm.</p>","PeriodicalId":15197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease","volume":"12 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12470863/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12090359","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of treatments for large vessel coronary artery disease between drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents.

Method: We searched databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, CNKI, and Wanfang, and selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies which compared drug-coated balloons (DCBs) with drug-eluting stents (DESs). The reference vessel diameter (RVD) should be greater than 2.75 mm. The results of 12 studies with a total of 2634 patients were included in this meta-analysis.

Results: The results showed that the DCB group was not inferior to the DES group in terms of the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR). (RR = 1.25, 95% CI: [0.84, 1.85], p = 0.27, I2 = 0%), and the incidence of bleeding events in the DCB group was lower than that in the DES group (RR = 0.30, 95% CI: [0.15, 0.59], p = 0.0004). The results also showed that the post-intervention minimal lumen diameter (MLD) in the DCB group was smaller than that in the DES group. (RR = -0.37, 95% CI: [-0.59, -0.16], p = 0.0007), but the follow-up MLD in the DCB group was not less than that in the DES group (RR = -0.03, 95% CI: [-0.14,-0.08], p = 0.61). Additionally the DCB group had less late lumen loss (LLL) compared with the DES group. (RR = -0.31, 95% CI: [-0.60, -0.02], p < 0.0001).

Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirms that in the early and late stages after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), DCB is not inferior in efficacy and safety to DES for de novo large coronary lesions with RVD > 2.75 mm.

药物涂层球囊与药物洗脱支架治疗大血管冠状动脉疾病:荟萃分析
目的:我们旨在对药物包被球囊和药物洗脱支架治疗大血管冠状动脉疾病进行荟萃分析。方法:检索PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane、中国知网、万方等数据库,选取比较药物包被球囊(DCBs)与药物洗脱支架(DESs)的随机对照试验(rct)或队列研究。参考血管直径(RVD)应大于2.75 mm。本荟萃分析纳入了12项研究的结果,共2634例患者。结果:DCB组靶区血管重建术(TLR)发生率不低于DES组。(RR = 1.25, 95% CI: [0.84, 1.85], p = 0.27, I2 = 0%), DCB组出血事件发生率低于DES组(RR = 0.30, 95% CI: [0.15, 0.59], p = 0.0004)。DCB组干预后最小管腔直径(MLD)小于DES组。(RR = -0.37, 95% CI: [-0.59, -0.16], p = 0.0007),但DCB组随访MLD不低于DES组(RR = -0.03, 95% CI: [-0.14,-0.08], p = 0.61)。此外,与DES组相比,DCB组的晚期管腔损失(LLL)更少。(RR = -0.31, 95% CI: [-0.60, -0.02], p < 0.0001)。结论:本荟萃分析证实,在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的早期和晚期,DCB治疗RVD > 2.75 mm的新发大冠状动脉病变的疗效和安全性不逊于DES。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease
Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
381
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信