Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2022
Safety and efficacy of drug-coated balloon for peripheral artery revascularization-A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ullah Waqas, Zghouzi Mohammad, Sattar Zeeshan, Ahmad Bachar, Zahid Salman, Suleiman Abdul-Rahman M, Sattar Yasar, Khan Muhammad Zia, Paul Timir, Bagur Rodrigo, Qureshi Mohammad Imran, Fischman David L, Banerjee Subhash, Prasad Anand, Alraies M Chadi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The relative merits of the drug-coated balloon (DCB) versus uncoated balloon (UCB) angioplasty in endovascular intervention for patients with symptomatic lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD) remains controversial.
METHODS: Online databases were queried with various combinations of keywords to identify relevant articles. Net adverse events (NAEs) and its components were compared using a random effect model to calculate unadjusted odds ratios (ORs).
RESULTS: A total of 26 studies comprising 26,845 patients (UCB: 17,770 and DCB: 9075) were included. On pooled analysis, DCB was associated with significantly lower odds of NAE (OR: 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.61), vessel restenosis (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.37-0.57), major amputation (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47-99), need for repeat target lesion (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31-0.47) and target vessel revascularization (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47-0.81) compared with UCB. Similarly, the primary patency rate was significantly higher in patients undergoing DCB angioplasty (OR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.19-1.75), while the odds for all-cause mortality (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.85-1.09) were not significantly different between the two groups. A subgroup analysis based on follow-up duration (6 months vs. 1 vs. 2 years) followed the findings of the pooled analysis with few exceptions.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of DCB in lower extremity PAD intervention is associated with higher primary patency, lower restenosis, lower amputation rate, and decreased need for repeat revascularization with similar all-cause mortality as compared to UCB.
METHODS: Online databases were queried with various combinations of keywords to identify relevant articles. Net adverse events (NAEs) and its components were compared using a random effect model to calculate unadjusted odds ratios (ORs).
RESULTS: A total of 26 studies comprising 26,845 patients (UCB: 17,770 and DCB: 9075) were included. On pooled analysis, DCB was associated with significantly lower odds of NAE (OR: 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.61), vessel restenosis (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.37-0.57), major amputation (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47-99), need for repeat target lesion (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31-0.47) and target vessel revascularization (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47-0.81) compared with UCB. Similarly, the primary patency rate was significantly higher in patients undergoing DCB angioplasty (OR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.19-1.75), while the odds for all-cause mortality (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.85-1.09) were not significantly different between the two groups. A subgroup analysis based on follow-up duration (6 months vs. 1 vs. 2 years) followed the findings of the pooled analysis with few exceptions.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of DCB in lower extremity PAD intervention is associated with higher primary patency, lower restenosis, lower amputation rate, and decreased need for repeat revascularization with similar all-cause mortality as compared to UCB.