We have located links that may give you full text access.
Angioplasty for dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulas: A meta-analysis of recent randomized controlled trials compared paclitaxel-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty.
Journal of Vascular Access 2023 December 6
BACKGROUND: Stenosis in arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) due to neointimal hyperplasia is one of the most common causes of hemodialysis vascular access dysfunction. Treating patients with dysfunctional AVF with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty may potentially improve outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of DCB angioplasty versus conventional balloon angioplasty by pooling evidence from the most recent randomized controlled trials.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane central databases. Two independent researchers screened the article, extracted interest, and evaluated included studies for risk of bias. Pooled estimation was conducted in terms of 6-month target-lesion primary patency (TLPP) and target-lesion reintervention (TLR), as well as other outcomes.
RESULTS: Results were expressed with odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of five RCTs were identified and included in the meta-analyses, with 1107 participants. DCB has a trend of a higher rate of TLPP (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.66-4.90, p = 0.181) and a significantly lower rate of TLR (0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.92, p = 0.034), as compared to conventional balloon angioplasty. No difference in the 6-month access circuit primary patency and reinvention was observed between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: DCB may be an alternative treatment of dysfunctional AVF given a trend of a higher rate of TLPP and a significantly lower rate of TLR than conventional balloon angioplasty within 6 months after the indexed procedure. Moreover, DCB was non-inferior to conventional balloon angioplasty in terms of safety. Considering variations in the DCB technique, further studies are warranted for a standardized process.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of DCB angioplasty versus conventional balloon angioplasty by pooling evidence from the most recent randomized controlled trials.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane central databases. Two independent researchers screened the article, extracted interest, and evaluated included studies for risk of bias. Pooled estimation was conducted in terms of 6-month target-lesion primary patency (TLPP) and target-lesion reintervention (TLR), as well as other outcomes.
RESULTS: Results were expressed with odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of five RCTs were identified and included in the meta-analyses, with 1107 participants. DCB has a trend of a higher rate of TLPP (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.66-4.90, p = 0.181) and a significantly lower rate of TLR (0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.92, p = 0.034), as compared to conventional balloon angioplasty. No difference in the 6-month access circuit primary patency and reinvention was observed between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: DCB may be an alternative treatment of dysfunctional AVF given a trend of a higher rate of TLPP and a significantly lower rate of TLR than conventional balloon angioplasty within 6 months after the indexed procedure. Moreover, DCB was non-inferior to conventional balloon angioplasty in terms of safety. Considering variations in the DCB technique, further studies are warranted for a standardized process.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app