In-stent restenosis (ISR), defined as a ≥50% reduction in coronary lumen diameter within the stent or within 5 mm of the stent edges, remains a relevant issue in the field percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (1). As first iteration in PCI, balloon angioplasty presented several drawbacks, including intimal and media dissection, abrupt vessel occlusion, late structural remodeling and, importantly, diffuse proliferative neointimal response due to traumatic vessel injury, resulting in a rate of restenosis greater than 40% (2). The introduction of coronary stents substantially improved procedural success and clinical outcomes after PCI by significantly reducing the risk of restenosis and nearly eliminating the risk of acute vessel closure with the consequent need for surgical standby (2). However, the lack of antiproliferative drug release from bare metallic platforms remained associated with higher rates of ISR and target vessel revascularization. Contemporary new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), with improved effective local cytostatic drugs and more predictable release, substantially reduced but not eliminated ISR, which is still found in approximately 12% of patients at 6-8 months angiographic follow-up (3). These data should not be overlooked because there is evidence showing a higher risk of mortality among patients developing ISR (4).A large number of factors may contribute to ISR such as mechanical factors (stent underexpansion, stent fracture, nonuniform stent strut distribution), technical factors (stent gap, barotrauma outside stented segment, residual uncovered atherosclerotic plaques) and biological factors (hypersensitivity reactions to stent components, such as stent platform, antirestenotic drug, polymer carrier, or drug resistance). Moreover, specific patient (for example, chronic kidney disease or diabetic patients) and lesion subsets [bifurcation lesions, diffuse coronary artery disease (CAD), small vessels] are associated with a higher risk of ISR.Over the past years, several techniques have been proposed for the treatment of ISR, including conventional balloon angioplasty, cutting or scoring balloons, vascular brachytherapy, additional stenting, drug-eluting balloons (DEB), and bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (5-7). DEB have the potential advantage to ensure local drug release and therefore avoiding an additional metal layer in previously stented coronary segment. As such, DEB may be considered as a less invasive option and part of a streamlined PCI approach together with the preferential use of radial over femoral access (8). Moreover, DEB as alternative to stent-based approaches may be particularly useful in case of the need for an abbreviated course of dual antiplatelet therapy (patients deemed at high bleeding risk or those requiring non-cardiac surgery) (9,10). Among new-generation DES, everolimus-and zotarolimus-eluting stents have been more frequently tested in randomized trials of ISR, while data from head-to-head comparisons in all-comers patients suggest equipoise between the...