Cargando…
Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials
BACKGROUND: No network meta‐analysis has considered the relative efficacy of cilostazol, home exercise therapy, supervised exercise therapy (SET), endovascular revascularization (ER), and ER plus SET (ER+SET) in improving maximum walking distance (MWD) over short‐ (<1 year), moderate‐ (1 to <2...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8200724/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33890475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.019672 |
_version_ | 1783707667752026112 |
---|---|
author | Thanigaimani, Shivshankar Phie, James Sharma, Chinmay Wong, Shannon Ibrahim, Muhammad Huynh, Pacific Moxon, Joseph Jones, Rhondda Golledge, Jonathan |
author_facet | Thanigaimani, Shivshankar Phie, James Sharma, Chinmay Wong, Shannon Ibrahim, Muhammad Huynh, Pacific Moxon, Joseph Jones, Rhondda Golledge, Jonathan |
author_sort | Thanigaimani, Shivshankar |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: No network meta‐analysis has considered the relative efficacy of cilostazol, home exercise therapy, supervised exercise therapy (SET), endovascular revascularization (ER), and ER plus SET (ER+SET) in improving maximum walking distance (MWD) over short‐ (<1 year), moderate‐ (1 to <2 years), and long‐term (≥2 years) follow‐up in people with intermittent claudication. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials testing 1 or more of these 5 treatments according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. The primary outcome was improvement in MWD assessed by a standardized treadmill test. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and health‐related quality of life. Network meta‐analysis was performed using the gemtc R statistical package. The Cochrane collaborative tool was used to assess risk of bias. Forty‐six trials involving 4256 patients were included. At short‐term follow‐up, home exercise therapy (mean difference [MD], 89.4 m; 95% credible interval [CrI], 20.9–157.7), SET (MD, 186.8 m; 95% CrI, 136.4–237.6), and ER+SET (MD, 326.3 m; 95% CrI, 222.6–430.6), but not ER (MD, 82.5 m; 95% CrI, −2.4 to 168.2) and cilostazol (MD, 71.1 m; 95% CrI, −24.6 to 167.9), significantly improved MWD (in meters) compared with controls. At moderate‐term follow‐up, SET (MD, 201.1; 95% CrI, 89.8–318.3) and ER+SET (MD, 368.5; 95% CrI, 195.3–546.9), but not home exercise therapy (MD, 99.4; 95% CrI, −174.0 to 374.9) or ER (MD, 84.2; 95% CrI, −35.3 to 206.4), significantly improved MWD (in meters) compared to controls. At long‐term follow‐up, none of the tested treatments significantly improved MWD compared to controls. Adverse events and quality of life were reported inconsistently and could not be meta‐analyzed. Risk of bias was low, moderate, and high in 4, 24, and 18 trials respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This network meta‐analysis suggested that SET and ER+SET are effective at improving MWD over the moderate term (<2 year) but not beyond this. Durable treatments for intermittent claudication are needed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8200724 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82007242021-06-15 Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials Thanigaimani, Shivshankar Phie, James Sharma, Chinmay Wong, Shannon Ibrahim, Muhammad Huynh, Pacific Moxon, Joseph Jones, Rhondda Golledge, Jonathan J Am Heart Assoc Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis BACKGROUND: No network meta‐analysis has considered the relative efficacy of cilostazol, home exercise therapy, supervised exercise therapy (SET), endovascular revascularization (ER), and ER plus SET (ER+SET) in improving maximum walking distance (MWD) over short‐ (<1 year), moderate‐ (1 to <2 years), and long‐term (≥2 years) follow‐up in people with intermittent claudication. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials testing 1 or more of these 5 treatments according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. The primary outcome was improvement in MWD assessed by a standardized treadmill test. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and health‐related quality of life. Network meta‐analysis was performed using the gemtc R statistical package. The Cochrane collaborative tool was used to assess risk of bias. Forty‐six trials involving 4256 patients were included. At short‐term follow‐up, home exercise therapy (mean difference [MD], 89.4 m; 95% credible interval [CrI], 20.9–157.7), SET (MD, 186.8 m; 95% CrI, 136.4–237.6), and ER+SET (MD, 326.3 m; 95% CrI, 222.6–430.6), but not ER (MD, 82.5 m; 95% CrI, −2.4 to 168.2) and cilostazol (MD, 71.1 m; 95% CrI, −24.6 to 167.9), significantly improved MWD (in meters) compared with controls. At moderate‐term follow‐up, SET (MD, 201.1; 95% CrI, 89.8–318.3) and ER+SET (MD, 368.5; 95% CrI, 195.3–546.9), but not home exercise therapy (MD, 99.4; 95% CrI, −174.0 to 374.9) or ER (MD, 84.2; 95% CrI, −35.3 to 206.4), significantly improved MWD (in meters) compared to controls. At long‐term follow‐up, none of the tested treatments significantly improved MWD compared to controls. Adverse events and quality of life were reported inconsistently and could not be meta‐analyzed. Risk of bias was low, moderate, and high in 4, 24, and 18 trials respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This network meta‐analysis suggested that SET and ER+SET are effective at improving MWD over the moderate term (<2 year) but not beyond this. Durable treatments for intermittent claudication are needed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8200724/ /pubmed/33890475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.019672 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis Thanigaimani, Shivshankar Phie, James Sharma, Chinmay Wong, Shannon Ibrahim, Muhammad Huynh, Pacific Moxon, Joseph Jones, Rhondda Golledge, Jonathan Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials |
title | Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_full | Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_fullStr | Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_short | Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing the Outcomes of Treatments for Intermittent Claudication Tested in Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_sort | network meta‐analysis comparing the outcomes of treatments for intermittent claudication tested in randomized controlled trials |
topic | Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8200724/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33890475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.019672 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thanigaimanishivshankar networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT phiejames networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT sharmachinmay networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT wongshannon networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT ibrahimmuhammad networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT huynhpacific networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT moxonjoseph networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT jonesrhondda networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT golledgejonathan networkmetaanalysiscomparingtheoutcomesoftreatmentsforintermittentclaudicationtestedinrandomizedcontrolledtrials |