©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Clin Cases. Nov 6, 2025; 13(31): 109019
Published online Nov 6, 2025. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v13.i31.109019
Published online Nov 6, 2025. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v13.i31.109019
Table 1 Comparative efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-coated balloons vs uncoated balloon angioplasty in femoropopliteal and below-the-knee arteries
| Clinical trials identifier/Ref. | Target vessel | Sample size (PCBs vs POBA) | Follow-up duration | Primary end point | Efficacy outcomes | Major adverse events rate (%) |
| Liistro et al[26], 2013 | BTK vessel; with: Diabetes; critical limb ischemia (rutherford class ≥ 4), significant stenosis; occlusion > 40 mm) | 65 vs 67 | 12 months | Binary in-segment restenosis (%); 27 vs 75; | Occlusion (%); 17.6 vs 55.4; complete index ulcer healing (%); 86 vs 67; P = 0.01 | 31 vs 51; P = 0.02; (mainly by a reduction in TLR and better ulcer healing) |
| Zeller et al[21], 2015 | Stenosis; restenosis; occlusion of the infrapopliteal arteries (excluding in-stent restenosis and experiencing claudication or CLI) | 36 vs 36 | 12 months | All-cause mortality, target vessel, amputation, thrombosis, revascularization (30 days) (%); 0% vs 8.3%; P = 0.239 | Patency loss (6 months) (%); 17.1 vs 26.1; P = 0.298; major amputations of the target extremity (12 months) (%); 3.3 vs 5.6; P = 0.631 | 41.1 vs 39.1; P = 0.957 |
| Rosenfield et al[25], 2015 | With symptomatic femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease | 316 vs 16 | 12 months | Primary patency of the target lesion (%); 65.2% vs 52.6%, P = 0.02 | Primary safety end point | Restenosis without target lesion revascularization (%); 62% vs 62.5%; target lesion revascularization; 38% vs 37.5% |
| Kinstner et al[22], 2016 | ISR of the SFA; P1 segment of the popliteal artery (accompanied by clinical symptoms) | 35 vs 39 | 12 months | Primary patency (%); 40.7 vs 13.4; P = 0.02 | Freedom from clinically driven TLR (%); 49.0 vs 22.1 | Not mentioned |
| Iida et al[27], 2019 | Superficial femoral; artery; proximal popliteal; artery | 68 vs 32 | 24 months | Primary patency (%); 79.8 vs 46.9; P < 0.001 | Free from CD-TLR (%); 90.8 vs 80.3; CD-TLR (%); 9.1 vs 20.7 | 15.4 vs 24.1; P = 0.384 |
| Teichgräber et al[28], 2020 | SFA; the proximal popliteal artery up to the P1 segment (with a lesion length ≤ 15 cm, accompanied by clinical symptoms) | 85 vs 86 | 6 months | LLL after 6 months (mm); 0.14 vs 1.06; P < 0.001 | TLR (%); 1.3 vs 17.1%; P < 0.001; restenosis (%); 13.2 vs 31.6; P = 0.011; primary patency (%); 94 vs 75; P < 0.001 | Not mentioned |
| Krishnan et al[29], 2024 | Rutherford clinical category 2 to 4 femoropopliteal PAD (accompanied by clinical symptoms) | 200 vs 100 | 60 months | All-cause mortality (%); 20.6 vs 20.2; P = 0.934 | Primary patency; TLR (%); 68.2 vs 67.2; P = 0.623 | 41.0 vs 44.6; P = 0.597 |
- Citation: Wang Y, Gao DK, Tian Y, She LQ, Fu WL, Luo G, Zhou YL, Huang AX. Applications and challenges of paclitaxel- coated balloons beyond coronary atherosclerotic heart disease. World J Clin Cases 2025; 13(31): 109019
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v13/i31/109019.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v13.i31.109019