Multiple student initiatives were developed in the Medical School of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, under the guidance of the Laboratory of Primary Health Care, General Practice, and Health Services Research, as an answer to the increasing needs of the Greek National Health System during the pandemic. In one group, students were responsible for the phone call communication with patients of certain areas to book an appointment for a rapid test, announce the results of the test, monitor the symptoms and the health condition of patients with mild COVID-19 and inform the GPs of the health centers. At around the same time, in another group, senior medical students were enlisted as volunteers, and they were distributed to seven vaccination centers in two different Health Districts of Northern Greece. The vaccination process was significantly facilitated by the support of students in the initial data collection and recording of the personal medical history of the incoming citizens. Supporting the medical staff to accelerate the process, helping to raise public awareness about vaccination, keeping in touch with clinical life and patients, and further training in vaccination and communication skills were cited as critical expectations by the volunteer students, which were largely met. Other schools could implement similar strategies of including medical students in community health projects and promote initiatives that support primary health care.

We report a case of a 57-year-old male patient, who presented at the Emergency Department due to an episode of retrosternal discomfort, provoked by mild exertion. Upon admittance, he was asymptomat...

We report a 57-year-old male patient, who presented due to angina pectoris, which had progressively worsened over the past several months. The ECG and echocardiogram upon arrival were normal. The p...

Background: Current guidelines recommend the use of either fractional flow reserve (FFR) or instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) for assessing intermediate coronary stenoses. However, FFR/iFR discordance occurs in approximately 20% of cases. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate whether deferring lesions with discordant FFR/iFR classification is associated with worse prognosis compared to those with negative concordant results (FFR–/iFR–). Methods: A systematic search was conducted in literature repositories to identify all studies that compared the clinical prognosis of deferred lesions with discordant and concordant FFR/iFR results. The primary endpoint was a composite clinical outcome of the individual secondary endpoints (death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization). Results: Three eligible observational studies (1735 deferred vessels) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, deferred lesions with FFR/iFR discordance presented numerically higher event rates for all primary and secondary endpoints compared to deferred lesions with negative concordance; however, none reached statistical significance. Deferred lesions with FFR–/iFR+ discordance were significantly associated with an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR]: 3.19; p = 0.049), while deferred lesions with FFR+/iFR– discordance were associated with a greater risk of revascularization compared to deferred lesions with negative concordance (OR: 3.24; p = 0.01). Conclusions: Compared to deferred lesions with negative concordant results, deferred lesions with discordant FFR/iFR results were overall not significantly associated with worse clinical outcomes; however, there was a significantly greater risk of death for deferred lesions specifically with FFR–/iFR+ discordance, and an increased risk of revascularization for deferred lesions with FFR+/iFR– discordance. Further dedicated trials are needed to improve guidance in clinical decision-making. The PROSPERO Registration: CRD420251135424, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251135424.

Background and Objectives: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty is a brief-contact endovascular drug-delivery technology in which efficacy must be generated during a single balloon inflation. Unlike drug-eluting stents (DES), DCBs have no permanent scaffold or polymer reservoir; they must preserve coating integrity during delivery, release drug at balloon-vessel contact, transfer drug into the arterial wall, and sustain biologically meaningful mural exposure after device removal. This review examines coronary DCBs as engineered platforms in which drug physicochemistry, excipient function, coating morphology, mechanical stability, balloon-vessel contact, tissue pharmacokinetics, and lesion substrate jointly shape angiographic and imaging response. Materials and Methods: By integrating bench coating-stability studies, computational delivery models, porcine pharmacokinetic and downstream-response studies, intravascular imaging, randomized clinical trials, and meta-analyses, this review proposes a platform-focused mechanistic framework. Results: DCB performance should not be interpreted as a simple drug-class effect. Devices carrying the same antiproliferative agent may differ because of coating cohesion, particle loss, excipient chemistry, adhesion switching, carrier design, dose density, release trigger, and temporary tissue-reservoir formation. Paclitaxel has physicochemical features favorable for brief-contact delivery, whereas limus-based balloons generally require more explicit delivery engineering through crystalline, nanoparticle, phospholipid, porous-infusion, or micro-reservoir architectures. Coating survival during tracking, triggered release, wall apposition, tissue deposition, intramural distribution, retention kinetics, and lesion preparation are treated as upstream determinants of late lumen loss, binary restenosis, late lumen enlargement, remodeling, and repeat revascularization. Conclusions: However, performance remains platform-specific rather than drug-class determined. The aim is not to provide a clinical algorithm, but to clarify how device engineering and lesion context shape the angiographic and imaging phenotype of contemporary coronary DCB therapy.

Background and Objectives: Coronary drug-coated balloons (DCBs) deliver antiproliferative therapy during a single inflation without leaving a permanent scaffold or implanted drug reservoir. Their performance therefore depends on preservation of the coating during delivery, efficient vessel-wall transfer, and sufficient tissue exposure after balloon removal. This review critically examines the evidence for platform engineering, tissue exposure, and angiographic or intravascular imaging response. Materials and Methods: This narrative review synthesized English-language experimental, pharmacokinetic, imaging, and clinical evidence identified through the original PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar searches and a documented PubMed search during revision on 9 September 2026. Exact queries, record dispositions and descriptive study appraisals are supplied; conference abstracts, preprints and unpublished data were excluded. Results: DCB performance is platform-specific rather than determined by drug class alone. Within both paclitaxel- and limus-based devices, excipient chemistry, coating or carrier architecture, release behavior, and retention strategy may influence drug delivery. Bench and computational studies identify potential transfer and drug-loss pathways, pharmacokinetic studies measure tissue exposure, and imaging and clinical studies assess morphology and outcomes separately. The cited human studies do not quantify coronary tissue drug exposure. Findings from unrelated platforms and models cannot establish a causal delivery-to-outcome pathway. Conclusions: Coronary DCBs should be evaluated as integrated, device-specific drug-delivery platforms. Standardized studies linking engineering performance and tissue exposure with imaging and clinical outcomes are needed.