Comparison of Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Drug-Coated Balloons versus Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Arteriovenous Fistulae: A Review of Systematic Reviews and Updated Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) compared with those of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) stenosis via a review of systematic reviews (SRs) and an update of the current meta-analysis.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Literature was searched to retrieve SRs comparing DCBs and PTA for AVFs. A narrative review of SRs and pooled analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Eleven SRs were included. DCBs demonstrated favorable outcomes at 6 and 12 months compared with PTA, with improved patency in 7 SRs and a trend toward favorable outcomes without statistical significance in 3 SRs. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was reported in 3 SRs; 2 reviews reported a significantly lower incidence in the DCB group than in the PTA group, whereas 1 review reported no significant differences at 12 months. Four studies reporting all-cause mortality revealed no significant difference between the 2 treatments. In the updated meta-analysis including 23 studies, DCBs demonstrated improved primary patency at 6 months (risk ratio [RR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.50) and 12 months (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19-1.55) and were associated with a lower incidence of TLR at 6 months (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.73) and 12 months (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.99). There was no difference in mortality between the 2 groups for 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A review of SRs and meta-analysis update revealed the consistent benefits of DCBs over PTA in treating AVFs in terms of primary patency and TLR. Compared with PTA, DCBs do not increase mortality risk.