Research Appraisals
Evidence-based critical appraisals of the latest medical research, systematically evaluated using Oxford CEBM methodology.
Showing 3 appraisals
The American journal of cardiology
Limus- Versus Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons for In-Stent Restenosis Treatment: A Systematic Review and Study-Level Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Drug-coated balloons are the preferred treatment for in-stent restenosis (ISR), avoiding the need for a second metallic layer. While both paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) and limus-coated balloons (LCB, typically sirolimus or biolimus) are used, direct comparative evidence is limited, particularly regarding their long-term angiographic efficacy and clinical safety. We conducted a systematic review and study-level meta-analyzis of studies comparing LCB with PCB for coronary ISR. A comprehensive search was performed across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of science for randomized controlled trials. Outcomes were compared using risk ratios (RR) for categorical data and mean differences for continuous data in a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Six randomized controlled trials involving 1,038 patients were included (552 in the LCB group and 481 in the PCB group). Compared with PCB, LCB were associated with a significantly higher risk of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (RR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.14; p = 0.04; I2 = 0%) and target lesion failure (RR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.62; p = 0.27; I2 = 0%). In contrast, both platforms demonstrated no differences in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.98; p = 0.96), myocardial infarction (RR: 0.73; p = 0.46), stent thrombosis (RR: 0.66; p = 0.57), or MACE (RR: 1.09; p = 0.58). Angiographic outcomes were comparable, including late lumen loss (mean differences: -0.00 mm; p = 0.65; I2 = 74.7%) and minimal lumen diameter (mean differences: -0.12 mm; p = 0.07). In patients with ISR, PCB reduced repeat revascularization compared with LCB. These data suggest a modest advantage for PCB in preventing restenosis following drug-coated balloon angioplasty for ISR.
16 June 2026
Read appraisal →Circulation
Determining the Physiological Threshold for Angina (ORBITA-FIRE): A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study
BACKGROUND: In stable coronary artery disease, the primary goal of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is symptom relief. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and nonhyperemic pressure ratios such as resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) are used to guide revascularization. Although these indices correlate with myocardial ischemia, they have never been validated against the onset of angina. The physiological thresholds for angina, FFRangina and RFRangina, angina (FFRangina at rest and during exercise remain undefined. METHODS: ORBITA-FIRE (Finding the Invasive Threshold for Symptom Relief in Exertional Angina) was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with stable angina and single-vessel coronary artery disease. After imaging-guided PCI, an in-stent balloon was incrementally inflated until angina occurred at rest. This angina threshold was verified against placebo inflation, and corresponding FFRangina and RFRangina values were recorded at symptom onset. The protocol was repeated during low- and high-intensity exercise to assess changes in angina thresholds with increasing cardiac workload. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were enrolled (mean age, 63.9±8.7 years; 74% male; 69% hypertensive; 23% diabetic; 91% with Canadian Cardiovascular Society class II-III angina). Median pre-PCI FFR was 0.59 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.46-0.70) and RFR was 0.61 (IQR, 0.40-0.82). Median FFRangina at rest was 0.29 (IQR, 0.23-0.35), increasing to 0.38 (IQR, 0.30-0.48) during low-intensity exercise and 0.45 (IQR, 0.36-0.55) during high-intensity exercise. RFRangina similarly increased from 0.22 (IQR, 0.16-0.30) at rest to 0.26 (IQR, 0.18-0.36) and 0.32 (IQR, 0.23-0.46) during low- and high-intensity exercise. All thresholds were significantly lower than clinical diagnostic cut points (P<0.001). Lower FFRangina and RFRangina thresholds were associated with greater symptom reproducibility across rest, low- and high-intensity exercise conditions (FFRangina: P=0.008, P<0.001, P<0.001, respectively; RFRangina: P=0.015, P<0.001, P=0.002, respectively). Lower angina thresholds across all conditions predicted higher baseline angina burden and greater symptom relief with PCI (probability of interaction >0.999). CONCLUSIONS: Physiological thresholds for angina, FFRangina and RFRangina, are highly individualized, vary with cardiac workload, and are consistently lower than the universal ischemia-based thresholds used to guide revascularization. These findings support integrating personalized, symptom-linked physiology to refine patient selection and to improve symptomatic response to PCI.
9 June 2026
Read appraisal →Interv Cardiol Clin
Proximal Cap Ambiguity
This article reviews how to approach the proximal cap of a chronically occluded coronary artery. Safely crossing this region of the lesion is a crucial step in the procedure. While many proximal caps are understood angiographically, a significant proportion are not. This article describes steps that can be taken to resolve anatomic ambiguity, either by the use of supplementary intravascular ultrasound or by more advanced maneuvers, which should enhance the safety and efficiency of the percutaneous coronary intervention.
1 Jan 2026
Read appraisal →