Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis compares long-term outcomes follow-up data comparing drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) and drug-eluting stents (DESs) in interventional treatment of small coronary artery disease (<3 mm). Methods: A systematic review was undertaken along with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The primary outcome was 1-3-year performance of DEB versus DES in major adverse cardiac events. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, MI, cardiac death, vessel thrombosis, major bleeding, target vessel revascularisation and target lesion revascularisation. Two independent reviewers extracted data. All outcomes used the Mantel-Haenszel and random effects models. ORs are presented with a 95% CI. Results: Of 4,661 articles, four randomised control trials were included (1,414 patients). DEBs demonstrated reduced rates of non-fatal MI at 1 year (OR 0.44; 95% CI [0.2-0.94]), and BASKET-SMALL 2 reported a significant reduction in 2-year bleeding rates (OR 0.3; 95% CI [0.1-0.91]). There was no significant difference in all other outcomes. Conclusion: Long-term follow-up of DEB and DES use in small coronary arteries demonstrates DEBs be comparable with DESs in all outcomes at 1, 2 and 3 years of follow-up. A significant reduction was found in rates of non-fatal MI at 1 year in the DEB arm, and a reduction in major bleeding episodes at 2 years in the BASKET-SMALL 2 trial. These data highlight the potential long-term utility of novel DEBs in small coronary artery disease revascularisation.
Keywords: Long-term; coronary; intervention; meta-analysis; small.
Copyright © 2023, Radcliffe Cardiology.