A brief review
Paclitaxel: Is a highly lipophilic, and rapidly absorbed by vessel walls and retained for days to weeks, making it ideal for DEBs, which deliver the drug during brief balloon inflation (30–60 seconds). Its cytotoxic action, disrupting microtubules and arresting cells in the M-phase, effectively inhibits neointimal hyperplasia without requiring prolonged drug release.
Sirolimus: Less lipophilic, sirolimus requires sustained release to achieve therapeutic levels, as it acts cytostatically by inhibiting the mTOR pathway, arresting cells in the G1 phase. This suits DESs, which provide continuous drug elution over weeks via polymer coatings. Its lower tissue retention makes it less effective for short-contact DEBs.
Paclitaxel hurts the endothelium with DES, but it heals with DEB ? How is this possible ?
Paclitaxel’s association with delayed healing and inflammation raised concerns about long-term safety in DESs, particularly after reports of late and very late stent thrombosis. It is abandoned in DES platform.
Paclitaxel born again as DEB avatar
It is claimed, Paclitaxel’s rapid uptake and lipophilicity make it suitable for DEBs, while sirolimus’s need for sustained release and favorable long-term profile suits DESs. It is very hard to believe, the published evidence, however robust they are. Only thing I can guess is, Paclitaxel enjoys a safety net in DEB , as the drug disappears so quickly before any useful effect or side effect could manifest. Ongoing research into sirolimus-coated balloons may shift this paradigm. Till then, we have to trust Paclitaxel, that remains the standard for DEBs due to pure scientific reasons.
Final message
Paclitaxel, which was at its crowning glory during the SYNTAX times , was phased out in DES due to various/ serious untoward effects.
Please bear with this highly biased opinion. I suspect, as a face-saving measure, the industry accommodated Paclitaxel into the DEB platform when it was chucked out of DES. I think we must learn to find truthful pathways of research.

