Two‐year follow‐up of a randomized multicenter study comparing a drug‐coated balloon with a drug‐eluting stent in native small coronary vessels: The RESTORE Small Vessel Disease China trial

Systematic Review on Role of Drug Eluting Stent (DES) Versus Drug-Coated Balloon (DCB) in Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to explain the current advancements in the treatment modalities for small vessel coronary artery disease (SVCAD) and de novo lesions post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), focusing on drug-coated stents (DES) and drug-coated balloons (DCB). Its goal is to address the lack of standards in the management of these lesions and to assess the potential of DCB as a preferential treatment strategy over DES in the long term. RECENT FINDINGS: Technological advancements have improved drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-coated balloons (DCB) which offer a more promising avenue for managing SVCAD. According to new data, DCBs, initially recognized for their efficacy in preventing restenosis within three to five years of stent placement, may offer superior outcomes compared to DES in certain clinical scenarios. This review shows that DCBs have a favorable therapeutic profile in the treatment of SVCAD, and they could be considered as an alternative to DES. Although the initial data is compelling, definitive conclusions cannot be met without further large-scale, long-term clinical trials. The implication of these findings suggests a shift in the future of SVCAD management and requires additional research to substantiate the long-term benefits of DCB use in SVCAD. Should ongoing and future studies corroborate the current evidence, DCB could emerge as the standard of care for SVCAD, significantly influencing clinical practices and future research.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Among Various Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Strategies for Small Coronary Artery Disease

It remains unclear which percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy is the most preferable in patients with small-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD). We sought to evaluate the clinical efficacy of various PCI strategies for patients with small-vessel CAD through a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched multiple databases for RCTs investigating the efficacy of the following PCI strategies for small-vessel CAD (<3 mm in diameter): drug-coated balloons (DCB), early-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), bare-metal stents (BMS), cutting balloon angioplasty, and balloon angioplasty (BA). The primary outcome was the trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), mostly defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization. The secondary outcomes included each component of MACE and angiographic binary restenosis. We performed a sensitivity analysis for RCTs without BMS or first-generation DES. Our search identified 29 eligible RCTs, including 8,074 patients among the 8 PCI strategies. SES significantly reduced MACE compared with BA (hazard ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 0.54) with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 55.9%), and the rankogram analysis showed that SES was the best. There were no significant differences between DCB and newer-generation DES in any clinical outcomes, which was consistent in the sensitivity analysis. BMS and BA were ranked as the worst 2 for most clinical outcomes. In conclusion, SES was ranked as the best for reducing MACE. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between DCB and newer-generation DES. BMS and BA were regarded as the worst strategies for small-vessel CAD.

One-year safety and effectiveness of the Agent paclitaxel-coated balloon for the treatment of small vessel disease and in-stent restenosis

The Agent device consists of a semi-compliant balloon catheter, which is coated with a therapeutic low-dose formulation of paclitaxel (2 µg/mm2) blended with an inactive excipient acetyl-tri-n-butyl citrate (ATBC). AGENT Japan SV is a randomized controlled study that enrolled 150 patients from 14 Japanese sites treated with Agent or SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon. This study also includes a single-arm substudy evaluating the safety and effectiveness of Agent in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). Patients with a single de novo native lesion (lesion length ≤ 28 mm and reference diameter ≥ 2.00 to  < 3.00 mm) were randomized 2:1 to receive either Agent (n = 101) or SeQuent Please (n = 49). The ISR substudy enrolled 30 patients with lesion length ≤ 28 mm and reference diameter ≥ 2.00 to  ≤ 4.00 mm. In the SV RCT, target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year occurred in four patients treated with Agent (4.0%) versus one patient with SeQuent Please (2.0%; P = 1.00). None of the patients in either treatment arm died. There were no significant differences in the rates of myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization and target lesion thrombosis through 1 year. In the ISR substudy, the 1-year rates of TLF and target lesion thrombosis were 6.7% and 0.0%, respectively. These data support the safety and effectiveness of the Agent paclitaxel-coated balloon in patients with small vessels and ISR.

Drug-coated balloon: an effective alternative to stent strategy in small-vessel coronary artery disease-a meta-analysis

Background

Small-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently observed in coronary angiography and linked to a higher risk of lesion failure and restenosis. Currently, treatment of small vessels is not standardized while having drug-eluting stents (DES) or drug-coated balloons (DCBs) as possible strategies. We aimed to conduct a meta-analytic approach to assess the effectiveness of treatment strategies and outcomes for small-vessel CAD.

Methods

Comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies reporting treatment strategies of small-vessel CAD with a reference diameter of ≤3.0 mm. Target lesion revascularization (TLR), target lesion thrombosis, all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as clinical outcomes. Outcomes from single-arm and randomized studies based on measures by means of their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were compared using a meta-analytic approach. Statistical significance was assumed if CIs did not overlap.

Results

Thirty-seven eligible studies with a total of 31,835 patients with small-vessel CAD were included in the present analysis. Among those, 28,147 patients were treated with DES (24 studies) and 3,299 patients with DCB (18 studies). Common baseline characteristics were equally distributed in the different studies. TLR rate was 4% in both treatment strategies [0.04; 95% CI 0.03-0.05 (DES) vs. 0.03-0.07 (DCB)]. MI occurred in 3% of patients receiving DES and in 2% treated with DCB [0.03 (0.02-0.04) vs. 0.02 (0.01-0.03)]. All-cause mortality was 3% in the DES group [0.03 (0.02-0.05)] compared with 1% in the DCB group [0.01 (0.00-0.03)]. Approximately 9% of patients with DES developed MACE vs. 4% of patients with DCB [0.09 (0.07-0.10) vs. 0.04 (0.02-0.08)]. Meta-regression analysis did not show a significant impact of reference vessel diameter on outcomes.

Conclusion

This large meta-analytic approach demonstrates similar clinical and angiographic results between treatment strategies with DES and DCB in small-vessel CAD. Therefore, DES may be waived in small coronary arteries when PCI is performed with DCB.

Drug Coated Balloon in the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Narrative Review

Drug coated balloons (DCBs) are currently indicated in guidelines as a first choice option in the management of instant restenosis, whereas their use in de novo lesions is still debated. The concerns raised after the contrasting results of the initial trials with DCBs in de novo lesions have been more recently overcome by a larger amount of data confirming their safety and effectiveness as compared to drug-eluting stents (DES), with potentially greater benefits being achieved, especially in particular anatomical settings, as in very small or large vessels and bifurcations, but also in selected subsets of higher-risk patients, where a 'leave nothing behind' strategy could offer a reduction of the inflammatory stimulus and thrombotic risk. The present review aims at providing an overview of current available DCB devices and their indications of use based on the results of data achieved so far.

Clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has a well-established role in revascularization for coronary artery disease. We performed network meta-analysis to provide evidence on optimal intervention strategies for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries.

Materials and methods

Enrolled studies were randomized clinical trials that compared different intervention strategies [balloon angioplasty (BA), biolimus-coated balloon (BCB), bare-metal stent (BMS), new-generation drug-eluting stent (New-DES), older generation sirolimus-eluting stent (Old-SES), paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB), and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES)] for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

Results

A total of 23 randomized clinical trials comparing seven intervention devices were analyzed. In terms of the primary outcome, New-DES was the intervention device with the best efficacy [surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), 89.1%; mean rank, 1.7], and the Old-SES [risk ratio (RR), 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45–2.64] and PCB (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.72–2.74) secondary to New-DES, but there was no statistically significant difference between these three intervention devices. All DES and PCB were superior to BMS and BA for MACE in both primary and sensitivity analysis. For secondary outcomes, there was no association between all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) with any intervention strategy, and additionally, the findings of target lesion revascularization (TLR) were similar to the primary outcomes.

Conclusion

Paclitaxel-coated balloon yielded similar outcomes to New-DES for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries. Therefore, this network meta-analysis may provide potential support for PCB as a feasible, effective, and safe alternative intervention strategy for the revascularization of small coronary arteries.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails], identifier [CRD42022338433].

Sirolimus-coated balloon versus everolimus-eluting stent in de novo coronary artery disease: Rationale and design of the TRANSFORM II randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is a widely adopted strategy for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease. DES implantation conveys an inherent risk for short- and long-term complications, including in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. Drug-coated balloons are emerging as an alternative approach to fulfill the "leaving nothing behind" principle and avoid long-term DES-related complications.

DESIGN

TRANSFORM II is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial, testing a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) versus the standard of care for native coronary vessels with a 2-3 mm diameter, in terms of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF; primary endpoint) and net adverse cardiovascular events (coprimary endpoint). Patients undergoing PCI will be randomized to be treated with either SCB or new-generation everolimus-eluting stent and will be followed up clinically for up to 60 months. Assuming a TLF rate of 8% at 12 months with DES, a sample size of 1325 patients was chosen to ensure an 80% power to detect a 1.5% lower incidence in the SCB group with a type I error rate of 0.05. The TRANSFORM II trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (identification number NCT04893291). Several substudies, including an optical coherence tomography assessment at 9 months (intracoronary imaging substudy), will investigate the study device in different clinical and lesion settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The randomized TRANSFORM II trial will determine whether a novel SCB is noninferior to a current everolimus-eluting stent when adopted for the treatment of de novo lesions in coronary vessels with a diameter between 2 and 3 mm.

Progress in drug-delivery systems in cardiovascular applications: stents, balloons and nanoencapsulation

Drug-delivery systems in cardiovascular applications regularly include the use of drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloons to ensure sufficient drug transfer and efficacy in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. In addition to the delivery of antiproliferative drugs, the use of growth factors, genetic materials, hormones and signaling molecules has led to the development of different nanoencapsulation techniques for targeted drug delivery. The review will cover drug delivery and coating mechanisms in current drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloons, novel innovations in drug-eluting stent technologies and drug encapsulation in nanocarriers for delivery in vascular diseases. Newer technologies and advances in nanoencapsulation techniques, such as the use of liposomes, nanogels and layer-by-layer coating to deliver therapeutics in the cardiovascular space, will be highlighted.

The usefulness of subtraction coronary computed tomography angiography for in-stent restenosis assessment of patients with CoCr stent using 320-row area detector CT

The aim of this study was to assess in-stent restenosis (ISR) of coronary artery for patients with CoCr stent using subtraction coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with one-breath-hold scan on 320-row area detector CT, invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as clinical standard.Patients who were referred for CCTA from January 2020 to May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Pre-contrast and CCTA was performed with dedicated one-breath-hold subtraction scan protocol and post processing to get subtracted-CCTA image without stent. Subjective image qualities and diagnosable rate were analyzed for CCTA and subtracted-CCTA respectively. The ISR degree of each stent was evaluated both on CCTA and subtracted-CCTA images. The receiver-operating characteristic curve with sensitivity, specificity, accuracy of CCTA, and subtracted-CCTA in the diagnosis of ISR were calculated with ICA as reference.Forty patients with 85 CoCr coronary stents of 3 to 3.5 mm diameter with ICA confirmation within 1 month were finally included. Subtracted-CCTA showed more diagnosable segments of stent (91.76% [78/85]) than those of CCTA (50.59% [43/85]) (P < .001). The subjective image quality score of CCTA was 2.23 ± 1.32 while 3.41 ± 0.90 on subtracted-CCTA (P < .001). Both subtracted-CCTA and CCTA showed high consistency with ICA (Kappa = 0.795 and 0.918 respectively). The area under the curve was 0.607 for CCTA and 0.757 for subtracted-CCTA (P < .001) for stent based diagnose, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy of CCTA, and subtracted-CCTA were 90.0%, 97.0%, 95.3%, and 87.5%, 100.0%, 97.43%, respectively.Subtracted-CCTA showed improved diagnose performance for ISR, which potentially reduce further follow-up ICA procedures for patients with CoCr stents.

Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Drug-Coated Balloon

The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an emerging percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device with theoretical advantages and promising results. Recent clinical observations have demonstrated that DCB tends to have both good efficacy and a good safety profile in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) for both bare-metal and drug-eluting stents (DES), de novo coronary artery disease (CAD), and other situation, such as high bleeding risk, chronic total occlusion, and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become an essential medication in daily clinical practice, but the optimal duration of DAPT after the implantation of a DCB remains unknown. At the time of the first in vivo implantation of paclitaxel-DCB for the treatment of ISR in 2006, the protocol-defined DAPT duration was only 1 month. Subsequently, DAPT duration ranging from 1 to 12 months has been recommended by various trials. However, there have been no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the optimal duration of DAPT after DCB angioplasty. Current clinical guidelines normally recommend the duration of DAPT after DCB-only angioplasty based on data from RCTs on the optimal duration of DAPT after stenting. In this review, we summarized current clinical trials on DCB-only angioplasty for different types of CADs and their stipulated durations of DAPT, and compared their clinical results such as restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stent thrombosis event. We hope this review can assist clinicians in making reasonable decisions about the duration of DAPT after DCB implantation.

Back to the future: DCB use instead of DES for the treatment of complex, native coronary artery disease

The increasing complexity of coronary artery lesions in patients with significant co-morbidities and the need for revascularization, but with the ineligibility for surgical approach, has turned the percutaneous coronary intervention a challenging task, especially in a setting in which short- and long-term complications after drug-eluting stent implantation are high. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have become an important tool to replace stent placement in specific situations such as small coronary artery disease and in-stent restenosis. Although preliminary data of DCB use in complex lesions is promising, the available data are still limited. Therefore, in this article, we review the most recent and relevant literature about the use of DCB in native vessel disease and in complex anatomies/patients, and pretend to justify the necessity to develop well design trials about the use of this therapy in such settings, also thinking at DCBs as a complementary tool to drug-eluting stents.

Drug-coated Balloons for Small Coronary Disease-A Literature Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the interventional treatment of coronary artery disease, new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) currently are the standard treatment. In addition, drug-coated balloons (DCB) are a well-established option for the treatment of in-stent restenosis in both bare-metal stents (BMS) and DES, where DCBs deliver an antiproliferative drug without the necessity of re-implanting a stent. Since the field of use for DCB has increasingly been extended to other indications such as de novo lesions in small vessel disease (SVD), a review of literature may be useful.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent randomized trial data show good efficacy and safety for DCB in de novo lesions, especially in small coronary arteries, and confirm long-term clinical efficacy and safety up to three years. DCB are an attractive and safe option in the treatment of de novo lesions in SVD.

Drug-Coated Balloon versus Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients with Small-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) of small-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) is related to an increased risk of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and stent thrombosis (ST). The application of the drug-coated balloon (DCB) for patients with SVD remains controversial.

Objectives

Assess the outcomes of DCB in the treatment of SVD compared with DES in patients with SVD.

Methods

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to June 2020, reporting the outcomes of DCB versus DES in the treatment of SVD, was performed.

Results

Four RCTs with 1227 patients were included. The results indicated that DCB was associated with the decreased risk for myocardial infarction (MI) compared with the DES, but the difference showed no significance (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24-1.03, P=0.06). And, there was no significant difference in death (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.17-3.43, P=0.72), cardiac death (OR 1.92, 95% CI 0.74-4.98, P=0.18), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.51-1.28, P=0.36), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.66-2.52, P=0.46), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.61-1.38, P=0.69) between the DCB group and DES group.

Conclusion

Compared with DES, DCB was associated with a decreased risk of MI among patients with SVD, but the difference showed no significance. The application of DCB in SVD is associated with comparable outcomes of death, TVR, and MACE when compared with DES.

Benefits with drug-coated balloon as compared to a conventional revascularization strategy for the treatment of coronary and non-coronary arterial disease: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 45 randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have shown promising results for the percutaneous treatment of de novo and restenotic lesions, involving both the coronary and femoropopliteal district. However, clinical outcomes data associated with the use of this devices are still unclear, with potential warnings on increased mortality being raised from initial studies. We aimed at performing an updated and comprehensive meta-analysis comparing DCB with conventional percutaneous revascularization strategies for the treatment of coronary (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD).

METHODS

Literature and main scientific session abstracts were searched for studies comparing DCB vs a standard percutaneous revascularization strategy, with or without stenting, for the treatment of CAD and PAD. The primary efficacy endpoint was mortality. Secondary endpoints were recurrent acute ischemic events (myocardial infarction or amputation) or target lesion revascularization (TLR).

RESULTS

We included 45 randomized trials, (CAD: 27 studies, PAD: 18 studies) with an overall population of 7718 patients, (56.4%) randomized to a DCB strategy. At a mean follow-up of19.3 ± 15.2 months, death occurred in 5.8% of the patients, with no significant difference between DCB or conventionally treated patients (5.9% vs 5.7%, OR[95%CI] = 0.89[0.71,1.11], p = 0.31; phet = 0.43). We observed a non-significant reduction in recurrent acute ischemic events, whereas the use of DCB significantly reduced the rate of TLR, with larger benefits observed in patients with PAD and respect to balloon-only angioplasty, while being lower in comparison with stent implantation. No significant interaction was observed with de novo lesions or in-stent restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current meta-analysis, the use of drug-coated balloons for the percutaneous treatment of CAD and PAD is associated to a comparable risk of mortality and recurrent acute ischemic events as compared to a conventional revascularization strategy, although offering larger benefits in terms of TLR, especially when compared with balloon-only angioplasty and in femoropopliteal disease.

Outcomes with drug-coated balloons vs. drug-eluting stents in small-vessel coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

The use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in small-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) remains controversial.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the outcomes of DCB vs. DES in de-novo SVD. We included a total of 5 RCTs (1459 patients), with (DCB n = 734 and DES n = 725).

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up duration of 6 months, DCB was associated with smaller late lumen loss (LLL) compared with DES (mean difference -0.12 mm) (95% confidence intervals (CI) [-0.21, -0.03 mm], p = 0.01). Over a median follow-up of 12 months, both modalities had similar risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (8.7% vs. 10.2%; odds ratio (OR): 0.94, 95% CI [0.49-1.79], p = 084), all-cause mortality (1.17% vs. 2.38%; OR: 0.53, 95% CI [0.16-1.75], p = 0.30), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (7.9% vs. 3.9%; OR: 1.26, 95% CI [0.51-3.14], p = 0.62), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (8.2% vs. 7.8%; OR: 1.06, 95% CI [0.40-2.82], p = 0.91). DCBs were associated with lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) compared with DES (1.55% vs. 3.31%; OR: 0.48, 95% CI [0.23-1.00], p = 0.05, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

PCI of SVD with DCBs is associated with smaller LLL, lower risk of MI, and similar risk of MACE, death, TLR, and TVR compared with DES over one year. DCB appears as an attractive alternative to DES in patients with de-novo SVD, but long-term clinical data are still needed.

Short- and long-term functional results following drug-coated balloons versus drug- eluting stents in small coronary vessels: The RESTORE quantitative flow ratio study

Background Immediate and long-term functional outcomes after percutaneous treatment of small vessel disease (SVD) with drug-coated balloon (DCB) versus drug-eluting stent (DES) remain unknown. The study sought to investigate whether treatment of de novo SVD with DCB yields similar functional results compared with DES, as judged with angiography-based quantitative flow ratio (QFR). Methods and results QFR was measured at pre-procedural, post-procedural and 9-month angiography in all available subjects from the non-inferiority RESTORE SVD China trial, in which patients were randomized to Restore DCB (n = 116) or Resolute DES (n = 114) study arms. Primary outcome of this analysis was 9-month QFR. Pre-procedural, post-procedural and 9-month QFR was performed in 84.8% (195/230), 83.0% (191/230) and 93.8% (181/193) cases, respectively. At 9 months, the QFR of DCB showed no significant difference to DES (0.88 ± 0.23 vs. 0.92 ± 0.12, p = 0.12). Both 9-month QFR and the QFR difference between post-procedure and 9-month follow-up were correlated with angiographic percentage of diameter stenosis and late loss, and predictive of 2-year clinical outcome. Conclusions Treatment of coronary SVD with DCB resulted in similar 9-month functional results compared with DES. This study provides evidences to the value of QFR as a mean of evaluating device performance after coronary revascularization. Clinical trial registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; ClinicalTrial.gov: Identifier: NCT02946307.

Small vessel coronary artery disease: How small can we go with myocardial revascularization?

The issue of small coronary artery atherosclerosis represents an intriguing aspect of coronary artery disease, which is related with higher rates of peri- and post-procedural complications and impaired long-term outcome. This problem is further complicated by the unclear definition of small coronary vessel. Recent randomized controlled trials have provided new data on possible novel interventional treatment of small coronary vessels with drug-coated balloons instead of traditional new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation. Also, the conservative management represents a therapeutic option in light of the results of the recent ISCHEMIA trial. The current article provides an overview of the most appropriate definition, interventional management, and prognosis of small coronary artery atherosclerosis.

Drug-coated balloons: Technical and clinical progress

The advancement of drug-coated balloons (DCB) presents an alternative nonstent method in the percutaneous treatment of atherosclerotic lesions. While the current generation of drug-eluting stents (DES) are the device of choice, especially in coronary artery disease (CAD), DCB has potential applications in the treatment of de novo lesions, in-stent restenosis (ISR), bifurcations, and in peripheral artery disease (PAD). In terms of coronary clinical experience, DCB is used most in ISR scenarios and more data are collected to support the use of DCB in de novo lesions compared to best-in-class DES. The use of DCB in bifurcation side branch treatment has demonstrated safety, and with good angiographic and clinical outcomes, but more data from randomized trials will be required to assess its clinical value. For PAD, the clinical outcomes of DCB with and without debulking devices in diseased femoropopliteal arteries and treatment of below-the-knee (BTK) vessels with DCB are discussed. Current data demonstrated conflicting long-term safety outcomes in the use of paclitaxel devices in the femoral and/or popliteal arteries, while the role of DCB in BTK disease remains uncertain due to a lack of randomized controlled trial data. In summary, this review provides an overall view of current DCB technologies and progress, followed by an update on DCB clinical data in the treatment of CAD and PAD.