Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2015
Efficacy of various percutaneous interventions for in-stent restenosis: comprehensive network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
СтатьяNetwork Meta-AnalysisНазвание 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.
Sethi Ankur, Malhotra Gurveen, Singh Sukhchain, Singh Param P, Khosla Sandeep
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a difficult problem in interventional cardiology. The relative efficacy and safety of available interventions is not clear. We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis using both direct evidence and indirect evidence to compare all available interventions.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We systematically searched electronic databases for randomized trials comparing ≥2 treatments for ISR. A network meta-analysis was performed using a Bayesian approach. Eleven treatments were compared in 31 studies with 8157 patient-years follow-up. Compared with balloon angioplasty, everolimus-eluting stent (hazard ratio [95% credibility interval], 0.13 [0.048-0.35]), paclitaxel-eluting balloon (0.32 [0.20-0.49]), paclitaxel-eluting cutting balloon (0.054 [0.0017-0.5]), paclitaxel-eluting stent (0.39 [0.24-0.62]), and sirolimus-eluting stent (0.32 [0.18-0.50]) are associated with lower target vessel revascularization. Balloon angioplasty is not different from cutting balloon (0.73 [0.31-1.5]), excimer laser (0.89 [0.29-2.7]), rotational atherectomy (0.96 [0.53-1.7]), and vascular brachytherapy (0.60 [0.35-1.0]). In drug-eluting stent ISR, balloon angioplasty was inferior to everolimus-eluting stent (0.19 [0.049-0.76]), paclitaxel-eluting balloon (0.43 [0.18-0.80]), paclitaxel-eluting stent (0.35 [0.13-0.76]), and sirolimus-eluting stent (0.36 [0.11-0.86]) for target vessel revascularization. There was no difference between treatments in probable or definitive stent thrombosis. The results of binary restenosis and target lesion revascularization were similar. Paclitaxel-eluting cutting balloon, everolimus-eluting stent, and paclitaxel-eluting balloon have the highest probability of being in the top 3 treatments based on low target lesion revascularization, but there was no statistical significant difference between them.
CONCLUSIONS: Balloon angioplasty is inferior to all drug-eluting treatments for ISR, including drug-eluting stent ISR. Drug-eluting stent, particularly everolimus-eluting stent, or paclitaxel-eluting cutting balloon and paclitaxel-eluting balloon should be preferred for treating ISR.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We systematically searched electronic databases for randomized trials comparing ≥2 treatments for ISR. A network meta-analysis was performed using a Bayesian approach. Eleven treatments were compared in 31 studies with 8157 patient-years follow-up. Compared with balloon angioplasty, everolimus-eluting stent (hazard ratio [95% credibility interval], 0.13 [0.048-0.35]), paclitaxel-eluting balloon (0.32 [0.20-0.49]), paclitaxel-eluting cutting balloon (0.054 [0.0017-0.5]), paclitaxel-eluting stent (0.39 [0.24-0.62]), and sirolimus-eluting stent (0.32 [0.18-0.50]) are associated with lower target vessel revascularization. Balloon angioplasty is not different from cutting balloon (0.73 [0.31-1.5]), excimer laser (0.89 [0.29-2.7]), rotational atherectomy (0.96 [0.53-1.7]), and vascular brachytherapy (0.60 [0.35-1.0]). In drug-eluting stent ISR, balloon angioplasty was inferior to everolimus-eluting stent (0.19 [0.049-0.76]), paclitaxel-eluting balloon (0.43 [0.18-0.80]), paclitaxel-eluting stent (0.35 [0.13-0.76]), and sirolimus-eluting stent (0.36 [0.11-0.86]) for target vessel revascularization. There was no difference between treatments in probable or definitive stent thrombosis. The results of binary restenosis and target lesion revascularization were similar. Paclitaxel-eluting cutting balloon, everolimus-eluting stent, and paclitaxel-eluting balloon have the highest probability of being in the top 3 treatments based on low target lesion revascularization, but there was no statistical significant difference between them.
CONCLUSIONS: Balloon angioplasty is inferior to all drug-eluting treatments for ISR, including drug-eluting stent ISR. Drug-eluting stent, particularly everolimus-eluting stent, or paclitaxel-eluting cutting balloon and paclitaxel-eluting balloon should be preferred for treating ISR.