Outcomes With Limus- vs Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Pooled result · TLRResult — go to the resultRelative risk 1.32 95% CI 0.84–2.08Authors' conclusion
Among patients undergoing DCB-only PCI, there were no differences in the risk of clinically driven TLR and other clinical outcomes between limus DCBs and paclitaxel DCBs. However, paclitaxel DCBs were associated with better late angiographic outcomes.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloons
- Participants
- 821 patients6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
- Comparison
- Limus DCB vs paclitaxel DCB
- Limus DCBn = 446
- Paclitaxel DCBn = 375reference
- Outcome
- Clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR)
- Follow-up
- Mean of 13.4 months
Methodological detailsrandom effects model, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane searched through January 2024
- Random effects model
- Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane searched through January 2024
Pooled result
TLR
Relative risk
1.32
95% CI 0.84–2.08
By group
Limus DCBvs Paclitaxel DCB
RR 1.32 (95% CI 0.84–2.08)
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | Limus DCB | Paclitaxel DCB | RR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Binary restenosis · late follow-up | 1.89 (1.14–3.12) | |||
| Late lumen enlargementMore frequent with paclitaxel DCBs | 27.5% | 50% | 0.59 (0.45–0.77) | |
| 0.20.5125Relative risk (log scale) |
| Outcome | Mean difference (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Late lumen loss · late follow-up | 0.16 (0.03–0.28) | |
| Minimum lumen diameter · late follow-up | −0.12 (−0.22 to −0.02) | |
| −0.4−0.200.20.4Difference (linear scale) |
Target lesion revascularization (TLR), de novo lesions vs in-stent restenosis (subgroup)
- No significant interaction
- P for interaction = 0.58
MACE, cardiac mortality, target vessel MI
- No differences between groups
Original publication
Outcomes With Limus- vs Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 8 July 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →