Review Article

Drug-Coated Balloon in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Table 1

Clinical trials of DCBs for the treatment of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Researchers (year) (reference)Group size (n)Follow-up (month)EndpointOutcome (DCB vs. DES)Conclusion

Vos et al. 2014 [33]DCB: 10012MACE, TLR5 MACE, 2 death, 3 received TLRDCB without stenting showed good one-year clinical outcomes
Ho et al. 2015 [34]DCB: 891Compensatory stenting, death4% patients received compensatory stenting, 4 patients dead in 1 monthDCB-only is feasible
Gobić et al. 2017 [35]DCB: 38/DES: 376MACE, LLLMACE: 0.0% (0/38) VS. 5.4% (2/37),
LLL: −0.09 ± 0.09 mm VS. 0.10 ± 0.19 mm
DCB-only strategy was safe, feasible and effective
Zhang et al. 2020 [36]DCB: 180/DES: 2003MACE, coronary artery dissectionMACE: 3.3% (6/180) VS. 1.0% (2/200),
Coronary artery dissection: 8.3% (15/180) VS. 3.0% (6/200),
DCB-only had the same safety and efficacy as stents
Hao et al. 2021 [37]DCB: 38/DES: 4212MACE, LLLMACE: 11% (4/38) vs. 12% (5/42)
LLL: −0.12 ± 0.46 mm vs 0.14 ± 0.37 mm,
DCB without stenting is safe and effective
Niehe et al. 2022 [38]DCB: 56/DES: 5324MACE5.4% (3/56) VS. 1.9% (1/53), The DCB group had same 2-yearclinical outcomes to DES group
Duan et al. 2022 [39]DCB: 84/DES: 12912MACEBefore PMS: 14.29% (12/84) VS. 16.28% (21/129),
After PMS: 9.7% (6/62) vs. 24.2% (15/62),
DCB-only was a possible strategy for pPCI

DCB, drug-coated balloon; DES, drug-eluting stent; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; PMS, propensity matching score; LLL, late lumen loss; TLR, target lesion revascularization; BMS, bare metal stent; pPCI, primary percutaneous coronary intervention.