Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 28, 2025

Interventional Diagnostic Procedure: A Practical Guide for the Assessment of Coronary Vascular Function
Published on: March 15, 2022
Percutaneous Treatment and Outcomes of Small Coronary Vessels: A SCAAR Report
Angelo Silverio1, Sergio Buccheri1, Dimitrios Venetsanos2
1Department of Medical Sciences, Cardiology and Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Objectives:
The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or newer-generation drug-eluting stents (n-DES).
Background:
Notwithstanding the available evidence from a few randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses, the best device for PCI in patients with small-vessel coronary artery disease is not yet established.
Methods:
The study included all consecutive patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing PCI in Sweden from April 2009 to July 2017. A small coronary vessel was defined by a device diameter ≤2.5 mm. The primary outcomes were restenosis and definite target lesion thrombosis at 3-year follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of all-cause death and myocardial infarction.
Results:
The study population included 14,788 patients: 1,154 treated with DCBs and 13,634 with n-DES. Overall, 35,541 PCIs were performed using 2,503 DCBs and 33,038 n-DES. The propensity score-adjusted regression analysis showed a significantly higher risk for restenosis in the DCB group compared with the n-DES group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.027; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.537 to 2.674). Conversely, no difference in the risk for target lesion thrombosis (adjusted HR: 0.741; 95% CI: 0.412 to 1.331) was detected. The risk for all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.178; 95% CI: 0.992 to 1.399) and myocardial infarction (adjusted HR: 1.251; 95% CI: 0.960 to 1.629) was comparable between groups.
Conclusions:
Because of the significantly higher risk for restenosis up to 3 years, this research suggests that DCBs are not an equally effective alternative to n-DES for percutaneous treatment of small coronary vessels.
More Related Videos
08:12Fully Endoscopic Mitral Valve Repair with Percutaneous Cannulation of Groin Vessels
Published on: May 26, 2023
13:48Reduction of Radiation Exposure during Endovascular Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Disease Combining Fiber Optic RealShape Technology and Intravascular Ultrasound
Published on: April 21, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Angina IV: Management