Literature DB >> 31445651

A systematic review and meta-analysis of drug-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty for dialysis access stenosis.

Ian Jun Yan Wee1, Hao Yun Yap2, Luke Tay Hsien Ts'ung2, Shaun Lee Qingwei2, Chieh Suai Tan3, Tjun Yip Tang2, Tze Tec Chong4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Arteriovenous fistulas for patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) are at high risk of stenosis. Despite conventional balloon angioplasty (CBA), restenosis rates are high. The use of a drug-coated balloon (DCB) may offer an alternative to reduce restenosis.
METHODS: This study has been performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. An electronic search on MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify articles evaluating DCB angioplasty for patients with HD access stenosis. Risk ratios (RRs) of primary patency were pooled, and relevant subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: There were 17 studies (8 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 9 cohort studies) included, comprising a total of 1113 stenotic dialysis accesses, of which 54.7% underwent DCB angioplasty and 45.3% underwent CBA. There was a significantly superior 6-month (RR, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.74; P < .00001; I2 = 62%) and 12-month (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.63-0.84; P < .0001; I2 = 53%) primary patency in the DCB angioplasty group in comparison to the CBA group (71.0% vs 49.2% at 6 months; 44.2% vs 20.6% at 12 months). Subgroup analyses of study design (RCTs, cohort studies) showed similar trends. Sensitivity analyses by excluding one poor-quality RCT and those employing the crossover analysis design also showed similar results. Studies investigating central venous stenosis showed significantly better 6-month (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.79; P = .0009; I2 = 67%) and 12-month (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.85; P = .0004; I2 = 64%) primary patency in the DCB angioplasty group in comparison to the CBA group. The pooled rate of minor complications was low in both the DCB (1.1%) and CBA (0.9%) groups.
CONCLUSIONS: DCB angioplasty appears to be a better and safe alternative to CBA in treating patients with HD stenosis in terms of 6- and 12-month primary patency. However, a larger trial is warranted to establish these findings.
Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Central venous stenosis; Conventional balloon angioplasty; Dialysis access stenosis; Drug-coated balloon

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31445651     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.01.082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  4 in total

Review 1.  Intimal Hyperplasia and Arteriovenous Fistula Failure: Looking Beyond Size Differences.

Authors:  Roberto I Vazquez-Padron; Juan C Duque; Marwan Tabbara; Loay H Salman; Laisel Martinez
Journal:  Kidney360       Date:  2021-08

2.  Use of Paclitaxel Coated Drug Eluting Technology to Improve Central Vein Patency for Haemodialysis Access Circuits: Any Benefit?

Authors:  Tze Tec Chong; Hao Yun Yap; Chieh Suai Tan; Qingwei Shaun Lee; Sze Ling Chan; Ian Jun Yan Wee; Tjun Yip Tang
Journal:  Vasc Specialist Int       Date:  2020-03-31

3.  Drug-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty of hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula or graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Min-Tsun Liao; Meng-Kan Chen; Mu-Yang Hsieh; Nai-Lun Yeh; Kuo-Liong Chien; Chih-Ching Lin; Chih-Cheng Wu; Wei-Chu Chie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Early (6 months) results of a pilot prospective study to investigate the efficacy and safety of sirolimus coated balloon angioplasty for dysfunctional arterio-venous fistulas: MAgicTouch Intervention Leap for Dialysis Access (MATILDA) Trial.

Authors:  Tjun Y Tang; Shereen X Y Soon; Charyl J Q Yap; Sze Ling Chan; Ru Yu Tan; Suh Chien Pang; Shaun Q W Lee; Hao Yun Yap; Edward T C Choke; Chieh Suai Tan; Tze Tec Chong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.