Angioplasty for dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulas: a meta-analysis of recent randomized controlled trials compared paclitaxel-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty

Abstract

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. 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 Medline, 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 were expressed with odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results A total of 4 RCTs were identified and included in the meta-analyses, with 911 participants. There was no significant increase in rates of 6-month TLPP (OR 1.63, 95%CI 0.39–6.79, p = 0.35), or decrease in 6-month TLR (OR 0.45, 95%CI 0.17–1.19 p = 0.07) in patients who received DCB as compared to those who received conventional balloon angioplasty. Similarly, we found no difference in the 6-month access circuit primary patency and reinvention between the two groups. Conclusion There was no evidence supporting that DCB has a statistically significant higher rate of TLPP and lower rates of TLR in the treatment of dysfunctional AVF than conventional balloon angioplasty. However, DCB was non-inferior to conventional balloon angioplasty in terms of safety. Therefore, further study is needed to clarify whether DCB angioplasty can benefit hemodialysis patients with dysfunction AVF.