Abstract
Objective: Owing to the lack of comparative evidence between the endovascular technologies for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) stenosis treatments, we sought to summarize the reported data comparing the effectiveness of different endovascular approaches for the treatment of AVF stenoses at the juxta-anastomotic site.
Methods: We performed a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from inception to June 12, 2018 for observational and randomized studies that had examined the effectiveness of AVF stenosis treatment using plain percutaneous balloon angioplasty (PTA), cutting balloon angioplasty, drug-eluting balloon (DEB) angioplasty, high-pressure balloon angioplasty, and stenting. Bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Collaboration tool for randomized studies. Article screening, full-text review, assessment of bias, and data collection were conducted in duplicate, with a third reviewer to reconcile any discrepancies. We conducted a qualitative synthesis of the available evidence and a quantitative meta-analysis for the primary assisted patency outcome. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager, version 5.3, using random effects models, with the I-2 statistic used to assess heterogeneity. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.
Results: Our search yielded 3683 reports. Of these, three randomized trials and three observational studies were included. Three studies with 342 patients had described the effectiveness of high-pressure balloon angioplasty, conventional PTA, and stenting and had analyzed the data qualitatively. Three studies with 141 patients had investigated native AVF patency after DEB angioplasty and conventional PTA and were included in the meta-analysis. DEB angioplasty showed significantly greater primary assisted patency rates at 12 months after treatment compared with PTA (odds ratio, 3.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-10.14; I-2 = 49%). No statistically significant differences were found in 6-month primary assisted patency among the treatment groups (odds ratio, 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-6.45; I-2 = 50%). A total of 58 of 72 AVFs remained patent 6 months after DEB angioplasty compared with 45 of 69 at 6 months after PTA. At 12 months after treatment, 48 of 72 AVFs remained patent after DEB angioplasty compared with 23 of 69 AVFs after PTA.
Conclusions: Our findings suggest DEB angioplasty is a more effective treatment option for AVF stenosis at the juxtaanastomotic site compared with PTA. Although DEB angioplasty might provide longer term patency than other endovascular treatments, further high-quality data are needed to confirm this finding.