Cargando…

Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Patients with end-stage renal disease may require arteriovenous (AV) access in the form of arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs) or arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) for haemodialysis. AV access dysfunction requires intervention such as plain balloon angioplasty or covered stents to regain patency....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ng, Benjamin, Fugger, Magnus, Onakpoya, Igho Jovwoke, Macdonald, Andrew, Heneghan, Carl
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8191614/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34108161
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044356
_version_ 1783705899955650560
author Ng, Benjamin
Fugger, Magnus
Onakpoya, Igho Jovwoke
Macdonald, Andrew
Heneghan, Carl
author_facet Ng, Benjamin
Fugger, Magnus
Onakpoya, Igho Jovwoke
Macdonald, Andrew
Heneghan, Carl
author_sort Ng, Benjamin
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Patients with end-stage renal disease may require arteriovenous (AV) access in the form of arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs) or arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) for haemodialysis. AV access dysfunction requires intervention such as plain balloon angioplasty or covered stents to regain patency. AIM: To systematically review and meta-analyse the patency outcomes of covered stents in failing haemodialysis AV access, compared with balloon angioplasty. METHODS: The review was first registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018069955) before data collection. We searched six electronic databases to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up until August 2020, without language restriction. Two reviewers assessed the suitability and quality of studies for inclusion using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. We meta-analysed data using a random-effects model. RESULTS: We included seven studies including 1147 patients in the systematic review, of which 867 had AVGs and 280 had AVFs. One study was an ongoing RCT. In the meta-analyses, we assessed patients with failing AVGs only. Overall risk of bias was moderate. Covered stents were associated with lower loss of patency versus angioplasty alone at 6, 12 and 24 months (OR 4.48, 95% CI 1.98 to 10.14, p<0.001; OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.74 to 9.54, p=0.001; OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.29, p=0.01, respectively). Covered stents afforded superior access circuit primary patency compared with angioplasty alone at 6 and 12 months (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.80, p<0.001; OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.41, p=0.02, respectively). This was not significant at 24 months. There was no significant difference in loss of secondary patency between groups at 12 or 24 months (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.23, p=0.25; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.154, p=0.34, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results support use of covered stents over angioplasty alone, at 6, 12 and 24 months in failing AVGs. Further clinical trials are warranted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8191614
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81916142021-06-25 Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis Ng, Benjamin Fugger, Magnus Onakpoya, Igho Jovwoke Macdonald, Andrew Heneghan, Carl BMJ Open Radiology and Imaging INTRODUCTION: Patients with end-stage renal disease may require arteriovenous (AV) access in the form of arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs) or arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) for haemodialysis. AV access dysfunction requires intervention such as plain balloon angioplasty or covered stents to regain patency. AIM: To systematically review and meta-analyse the patency outcomes of covered stents in failing haemodialysis AV access, compared with balloon angioplasty. METHODS: The review was first registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018069955) before data collection. We searched six electronic databases to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up until August 2020, without language restriction. Two reviewers assessed the suitability and quality of studies for inclusion using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. We meta-analysed data using a random-effects model. RESULTS: We included seven studies including 1147 patients in the systematic review, of which 867 had AVGs and 280 had AVFs. One study was an ongoing RCT. In the meta-analyses, we assessed patients with failing AVGs only. Overall risk of bias was moderate. Covered stents were associated with lower loss of patency versus angioplasty alone at 6, 12 and 24 months (OR 4.48, 95% CI 1.98 to 10.14, p<0.001; OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.74 to 9.54, p=0.001; OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.29, p=0.01, respectively). Covered stents afforded superior access circuit primary patency compared with angioplasty alone at 6 and 12 months (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.80, p<0.001; OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.41, p=0.02, respectively). This was not significant at 24 months. There was no significant difference in loss of secondary patency between groups at 12 or 24 months (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.23, p=0.25; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.154, p=0.34, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results support use of covered stents over angioplasty alone, at 6, 12 and 24 months in failing AVGs. Further clinical trials are warranted. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8191614/ /pubmed/34108161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044356 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Radiology and Imaging
Ng, Benjamin
Fugger, Magnus
Onakpoya, Igho Jovwoke
Macdonald, Andrew
Heneghan, Carl
Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Radiology and Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8191614/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34108161
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044356
work_keys_str_mv AT ngbenjamin coveredstentsversusballoonangioplastyforfailureofarteriovenousaccessasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fuggermagnus coveredstentsversusballoonangioplastyforfailureofarteriovenousaccessasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT onakpoyaighojovwoke coveredstentsversusballoonangioplastyforfailureofarteriovenousaccessasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT macdonaldandrew coveredstentsversusballoonangioplastyforfailureofarteriovenousaccessasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT heneghancarl coveredstentsversusballoonangioplastyforfailureofarteriovenousaccessasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis