Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Dec 7;10(23):e022060.
doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.022060. Epub 2021 Nov 19.

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty for Hemodialysis Dysfunction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Chenyu Liu  1 , Matthew Wolfers  2 , Bint-E Zainab Awan  1 , Issa Ali  1 , Adrian Michael Lorenzana  3 , Quinn Smith  4 , George Tadros  2 , Qian Yu  5
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty for Hemodialysis Dysfunction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Chenyu Liu et al. J Am Heart Assoc. .

Abstract

Background Both drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and conventional plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) can be implemented to treat hemodialysis dysfunction. The present study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of these 2 approaches by conducting a meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials. Methods and Results PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were queried from establishment to January 2021. A total of 18 randomized controlled trials including 877 and 875 patients in the DCB and PBA groups, respectively, were included in the present meta-analysis. Target lesion primary patency, circuit patency, target lesion revascularization, and mortality were pooled. Odds ratios (ORs) were reported with 95% CIs. Publication bias was analyzed with funnel plot and Egger test. Target lesion primary patency was higher among patients who underwent DCB (OR, 2.93 [95% CI, 2.13-4.03], P<0.001 at 6 months; OR, 2.47 [95% CI, 1.53-3.99], P<0.001 at 1 year). Also, the DCB group had a higher dialysis circuit patency at 6 months (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.56-3.77 [P<0.001]) and 1 year (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.22-3.00 [P=0.005]). Compared with the PBA group, the DCB group had lower odds of target lesion revascularization during follow-up (OR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.23-0.82], P=0.001 at 6 months; OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.32-1.73], P=0.490 at 1 year). The OR of mortality was comparable between 2 groups at 6 months (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.42-3.33 [P=0.760]) and 1 year (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.58-1.48 [P=0.750]). Conclusions Based on evidence from 18 randomized controlled trials, DCB angioplasty is superior to PBA in maintaining target lesion primary patency and circuit patency among patients with dialysis circuit stenosis. DCB angioplasty also reduces target lesion revascularization with a similar risk of mortality compared with PBA.

Keywords: arteriovenous fistula; arteriovenous graft; balloon angioplasty; drug‐coated balloon angioplasty; hemodialysis dysfunction; meta‐analysis; plain balloon angioplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the screening process.
RCT indicates randomized controlled trial.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Target lesion primary patency after drug‐coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and plain balloon angioplasty (PBA).
Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were stratified by follow‐up length (6 and 12 months).
Figure 3
Figure 3. Circuit patency after drug‐coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and plain balloon angioplasty (PBA).
Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were stratified by follow‐up length (6 and 12 months).
Figure 4
Figure 4. Target lesion revascularization after drug‐coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and plain balloon angioplasty (PBA).
Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were stratified by follow‐up length (6 and 12 months).
Figure 5
Figure 5. Mortality after drug‐coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and plain balloon angioplasty (PBA).
Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were stratified by follow‐up length (6 and 12 months).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bikbov B, Purcell CA, Levey AS, Smith M, Abdoli A, Abebe M, Adebayo OM, Afarideh M, Agarwal SK, Agudelo‐Botero M, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of chronic kidney disease, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2020;395:709–733. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30045-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mickley V. Stenosis and thrombosis in haemodialysis fistulae and grafts: the surgeon's point of view. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2004;19:309–311. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfg504 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ghonemy TA, Farag SE, Soliman SA, Amin EM, Zidan AA. Vascular access complications and risk factors in hemodialysis patients: a single center study. Alexandria J Med. 2016;52:67–71. doi: 10.1016/j.ajme.2015.04.002 - DOI
    1. Yap YS, Chi WC, Lin CH, Liu YC, Wu YW. Association of early failure of arteriovenous fistula with mortality in hemodialysis patients. Sci Rep. 2021;11:5699. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85267-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lok CE, Huber TS, Lee T, Shenoy S, Yevzlin AS, Abreo K, Allon M, Asif A, Astor BC, Glickman MH, et al. KDOQI clinical practice guideline for vascular access: 2019 update. Am J Kidney Dis. 2020;75:S1–S164. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2019.12.001 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types