Comparison of Endovascular Interventions for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery Disease: A Network Meta-analysis

Andrew W. Schwartz BS , Yousuf Shah MD , Haocheng Huang MS , Ashwin Nathan MD, MSHP , Alexander C. Fanaroff MD, MHS , Jay S. Giri MD, MPH , Sahil A. Parikh MD , Alexandra J. Lansky MD , Tayyab Shah MD
{"title":"Comparison of Endovascular Interventions for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery Disease: A Network Meta-analysis","authors":"Andrew W. Schwartz BS ,&nbsp;Yousuf Shah MD ,&nbsp;Haocheng Huang MS ,&nbsp;Ashwin Nathan MD, MSHP ,&nbsp;Alexander C. Fanaroff MD, MHS ,&nbsp;Jay S. Giri MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Sahil A. Parikh MD ,&nbsp;Alexandra J. Lansky MD ,&nbsp;Tayyab Shah MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jscai.2024.102432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>To understand the relative safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment modalities used for superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare outcomes between percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), atherectomy (A), bare metal stent (BMS), brachytherapy/radiotherapy, covered stent graft (CSG), cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA), drug-coated balloon (DCB), drug-eluting stent (DES), and intravascular lithotripsy (L).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed from January 2000 to January 2023 to identify randomized trials comparing endovascular interventions for the treatment of SFA disease. The primary end points were technical success and 12-month primary patency.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In total, 57 studies (9089 patients) were included. The mean age of the included patients was 68.4 years, 41.4% had diabetes, 18.3% had critical limb ischemia, and 81.3% had de novo lesions. A mean of 1.2 lesions were treated per patient. Technical success was superior for CSG, BMS, and A+DCB compared with PTA, while A+DCB and CSG were superior to DCB. All interventions except brachytherapy alone had superior primary patency compared with PTA. There were no significant differences in 12-month mortality or major amputation. All interventions except L+DCB, PTA+A, and CBA were superior to PTA regarding target lesion revascularization, while only DCB, DES, and BMS were better than PTA at improving Rutherford classification.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In SFA disease, PTA alone is mostly inferior to other endovascular techniques. This comparison of other endovascular techniques will be valuable for endovascular device selection in the treatment of SFA disease.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73990,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions","volume":"4 1","pages":"Article 102432"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772930324020970","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

To understand the relative safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment modalities used for superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare outcomes between percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), atherectomy (A), bare metal stent (BMS), brachytherapy/radiotherapy, covered stent graft (CSG), cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA), drug-coated balloon (DCB), drug-eluting stent (DES), and intravascular lithotripsy (L).

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed from January 2000 to January 2023 to identify randomized trials comparing endovascular interventions for the treatment of SFA disease. The primary end points were technical success and 12-month primary patency.

Results

In total, 57 studies (9089 patients) were included. The mean age of the included patients was 68.4 years, 41.4% had diabetes, 18.3% had critical limb ischemia, and 81.3% had de novo lesions. A mean of 1.2 lesions were treated per patient. Technical success was superior for CSG, BMS, and A+DCB compared with PTA, while A+DCB and CSG were superior to DCB. All interventions except brachytherapy alone had superior primary patency compared with PTA. There were no significant differences in 12-month mortality or major amputation. All interventions except L+DCB, PTA+A, and CBA were superior to PTA regarding target lesion revascularization, while only DCB, DES, and BMS were better than PTA at improving Rutherford classification.

Conclusions

In SFA disease, PTA alone is mostly inferior to other endovascular techniques. This comparison of other endovascular techniques will be valuable for endovascular device selection in the treatment of SFA disease.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
血管内介入治疗股浅动脉疾病的比较:网络荟萃分析
背景:为了了解用于股浅动脉(SFA)疾病的血管内治疗方式的相对安全性和有效性,我们进行了一项网络meta分析,比较了经皮腔内血管成形术(PTA)、动脉粥样硬化切除术(a)、裸金属支架(BMS)、近距离治疗/放疗、覆盖支架移植(CSG)、切割球囊血管成形术(CBA)、药物包被球囊(DCB)、药物洗脱支架(DES)、方法:从2000年1月到2023年1月,我们对PubMed进行了系统的文献检索,以确定比较血管内干预治疗SFA疾病的随机试验。主要终点是技术成功和12个月的初级通畅。结果共纳入57项研究(9089例)。纳入患者的平均年龄为68.4岁,41.4%患有糖尿病,18.3%患有严重肢体缺血,81.3%患有新发病变。每位患者平均治疗1.2个病变。与PTA相比,CSG、BMS和A+DCB的技术成功率更高,而A+DCB和CSG的技术成功率更高。与PTA相比,除近距离治疗外,所有干预措施均具有更好的原发性通畅性。两组12个月死亡率和主要截肢率无显著差异。除L+DCB、PTA+A、CBA外,其他干预措施在靶区血运重建方面均优于PTA,而在改善Rutherford分级方面,只有DCB、DES、BMS优于PTA。结论在SFA疾病中,单纯PTA治疗大多不如其他血管内技术。这种与其他血管内技术的比较将对SFA疾病治疗中血管内装置的选择有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
48 days
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Table of Contents Bronchial Compression Following Surgical and Transcatheter Interventions for Coarctation of the Aorta Diagnostic Blind Spots in Patent Foramen Ovale Detection: Lessons From Femoral Vein Contrast Studies Breaking Down Barriers … and Calcium: The EMPOWERment of Women With Calcific Coronary Artery Disease
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1