Endovascular Treatment of Haemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistula with Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty: A Single-Centre Study

Comparison of Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Drug-Coated Balloons versus Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Arteriovenous Fistulae: A Review of Systematic Reviews and Updated Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) compared with those of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) stenosis via a review of systematic reviews (SRs) and an update of the current meta-analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature was searched to retrieve SRs comparing DCBs and PTA for AVFs. A narrative review of SRs and pooled analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Eleven SRs were included. DCBs demonstrated favorable outcomes at 6 and 12 months compared with PTA, with improved patency in 7 SRs and a trend toward favorable outcomes without statistical significance in 3 SRs. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was reported in 3 SRs; 2 reviews reported a significantly lower incidence in the DCB group than in the PTA group, whereas 1 review reported no significant differences at 12 months. Four studies reporting all-cause mortality revealed no significant difference between the 2 treatments. In the updated meta-analysis including 23 studies, DCBs demonstrated improved primary patency at 6 months (risk ratio [RR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.50) and 12 months (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19-1.55) and were associated with a lower incidence of TLR at 6 months (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.73) and 12 months (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.99). There was no difference in mortality between the 2 groups for 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A review of SRs and meta-analysis update revealed the consistent benefits of DCBs over PTA in treating AVFs in terms of primary patency and TLR. Compared with PTA, DCBs do not increase mortality risk.

Drug-eluting balloon (DEB) versus plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) in the treatment of failing dialysis access: A prospective randomized trial

Objective

To compare the efficacy of angioplasty using drug-eluting balloons (DEB) compared with plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) to reduce the rate of restenosis.

Methods

This prospective, single-centre, single-blinded, 1:1 randomized, clinical trial enrolled patients that had primary or restenotic lesions in native upper extremity arteriovenous (AV) fistulas or at the graft-venous anastomosis. Patients were randomized to angioplasty with a POBA or a DEB. The primary effectiveness endpoints were freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) and functional status of access circuit at 12 months.

Results

A total of 42 (28 male, 14 female; age range, 42–83 years) patients were enrolled. Patients were followed for 12 months. No significant differences were detected between the POBA and DEB groups regarding total number of TLR procedures (31 versus 36, respectively), freedom from TLR (3 versus 4, respectively) and functional status of the access circuit at 12 months (14 of 20 patients [70%] versus 17 of 22 patients [77%], respectively).

Conclusion

This clinical trial did not demonstrate any significant differences between DEB angioplasty and standard balloon angioplasty when treating dysfunctional haemodialysis access.

Drug-Coated Balloons for the Dysfunctional Vascular Access: An Evidence-Based Road Map to Treatment and the Existing Obstacles

An underlying stenosis within the venous limb of a hemodialysis access circuit is the main etiology for graft and fistula dysfunction as well as other symptoms such as arm, breast, and neck swelling. Treatment options for both peripheral and central venous stenoses include plain old balloon angioplasty, angioplasty with drug-coated balloons, and stenting. This article discusses the current evidence for the use of drug-coated balloon angioplasty in this patient population.

A UK Expert Consensus Approach for Managing Symptomatic Arteriovenous Fistula (AVF) Stenosis in Haemodialysis Patients

PURPOSE

Stenoses in mature arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are common and can negatively impact on the quality of haemodialysis, the longevity of the AVF and lead to debilitating symptoms. Multiple treatment options exist; however, management can vary between different centres. We aimed to establish multidisciplinary consensus on the optimal stepwise application of interventions based on evidence and consensus.

METHODS

A modified Delphi process was conducted with 13 participants from hospitals across the UK, all of whom have high-volume dialysis access practice.

RESULTS

The usual intervention to rectify de novo stenoses of mature AVFs is fistuloplasty, although surgery for inflow segment stenoses is also clinically acceptable. Appropriate first-line interventions include plain old balloon angioplasty or high-pressure balloon angioplasty; if these fail during the fistuloplasty, consider upsizing the balloon, prolonged balloon inflation or using alternative interventions, such as cutting or scoring balloons and ultra-high-pressure balloons. Alternative or subsequent interventions vary by anatomical site and may require additional multidisciplinary team input. For a stenoses recurring between 3 and 12 months, it is appropriate to consider interventions used de novo, but with a lower threshold for using drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in all regions and for using stent grafts in all regions but inflow segment. Recurrence after 12 months should be treated as a de novo lesion, with DCBs considered if they have been used successfully during previous interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations aim to provide a practical guide to multidisciplinary teams in order to optimise the use of multiple interventions for rectifying AVF stenoses and provide unified evidence-based practice guidelines.

Plain versus paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty in arteriovenous fistula and graft stenosis: An umbrella review

An umbrella review was performed to synthesize the evidence from systematic reviews/meta-analyses of clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) vs. conventional balloon angioplasty in arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and grafts stenosis.Medline (via PubMed) and SCOPUS databases were searched up to July 15th 2020. All meta-analyses that enrolled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PCB with plain balloons in AVFs and grafts were included. Re-analysis of original data was performed assessing predictive intervals (PI). Quality of the included meta-analyses was assessed using AMSTAR score. Eight meta-analyses were included and four clinical outcomes [target lesion primary patency (TLPP), circuit primary patency, mortality, complication rate] derived from 14 RCTs, were analyzed. There were no significant differences in the TLPP in meta-analyses providing data purely from autologous AVFs. Significant benefits regarding TLPP and circuit primary patency at 3, 6, and 12-months in favor of PCB were reported in four meta-analyses mixing AVFs and grafts; however when PI were assessed, in all but one meta-analysis these included the null value, indicating no significant benefit. In only one meta-analysis significant difference of TLPP at 12-months in favor of PCB was noticed. (Odds Ratio 0.0009 PI: 0.28-0.85) No mortality difference was noticed in four meta-analyses providing data up to 24 months. In conclusion this overview revealed a modest benefit of using PCB angioplasty compared to plain angioplasty in AVFs and graft stenosis. No increased mortality was noticed in the PCB group.

A Multicenter Global Registry of Paclitaxel Drug-Coated Balloon in Dysfunctional Arteriovenous Fistulae and Grafts: 6-Month Results

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and clinical benefit of the Lutonix drug-coated balloon (DCB) catheter for the treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) and grafts (AVG) in a heterogenous real-world population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter, prospective study enrolled 320 subjects from 12 countries in 25 sites across Europe and Asia. A total of 392 lesions were treated with the Lutonix 035 DCB catheter. Lesions were de novo and restenotic, located in every part of the circuit from the cannulation zone to central venous outflow. In-stent restenotic lesions also were treated. The primary safety endpoint was freedom from serious adverse events involving the access circuit through 30 days. The primary effectiveness endpoint was target lesion primary patency (TLPP) through 6 months. Secondary endpoints included access circuit primary patency (ACPP) at 6 months and the investigation of factors that would independently influence the primary endpoints.

RESULTS

The primary safety endpoint was 95.5%, while TLPP was 73.9% at 6 months, per Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. ACPP was 71% at 6 months. TLPP for stenosis of AVFs was 78.1%. Subgroup analysis showed significantly improved TLPP when DCB was dilated for ≥120 seconds (P = .007). TLPP was significantly better when predilation occurred compared with cases where only DCB angioplasty was performed (77% vs 48.6%, P = .0005).

CONCLUSIONS

The Lutonix AV Global Registry confirms that the Lutonix DCB is a safe and effective treatment option in real-world patients with dysfunctional AVF or AVG. Procedural details had a significant role in TLPP. No significant difference in TLPP was observed among different treatment areas.

Network meta-analysis of trials comparing first line endovascular treatments for arteriovenous fistula stenosis

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the comparative effectiveness of different endovascular treatments for patients with failing autogenous arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) with outflow vein stenosis.

METHODS

The Medline (via PubMed) and SCOPUS databases were searched. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that had investigated the effectiveness of plain balloon angioplasty (PBA), cutting balloon angioplasty, and drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCBA) to treat vein stenoses in autogenous AVFs. Studies of central vein stenosis were excluded. The main outcome measures were the failure rates at 6 months and 1 year after treatment.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials were included, with 814 patients, 395 of whom had undergone PBA. The network meta-analysis showed that DCBA at 6 months was significantly more effective than PBA (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.81) and ranked as the best treatment option, although the difference was not statistically significant compared with cutting balloon angioplasty (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-2.12). The differences among the three treatments at 1 year were not statistically significant. Additional conventional pairwise meta-analyses did not find significant differences at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

In failing AVFs with outflow stenosis, DCBA was significantly superior to PBA, with improved 6-month failure rates. However the effectiveness of DCBA in the long term deserves further investigation.

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty for Dysfunctional Autogenous Radiocephalic Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

To report the mid-term results of a single-center randomized controlled trial comparing drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DBA) and plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) for the treatment of dysfunctional radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas (RCAVFs).

Materials and Methods

In this prospective study, 39 patients (mean age, 62.2 years; 21 males, 18 females) with RCAVFs failing due to juxta-anastomotic stenosis were randomly assigned to undergo either both DBA and PBA (n = 20, DBA group) or PBA alone (n = 19, PBA group) between June 2016 and June 2018. Primary endpoints were technical and clinical success and target lesion primary patency (TLPP); secondary outcomes were target lesion secondary patency (TLSP) and complication rates. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier product limit estimator.

Results

Demographic data and baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the groups. Technical and clinical success rates were 100% in both groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in the mean duration of TLPP (DBA group: 26.7 ± 3.6 months; PBA group: 27.0 ± 3.8 months; p = 0.902) and TLSP (DBA group: 37.3 ± 2.6 months; PBA group: 40.4 ± 1.5 months; p = 0.585). No procedural or post-procedural complications were identified.

Conclusion

Paclitaxel-coated balloon use did not significantly improve TLPP or TLSP in the treatment of juxta-anastomotic stenosis of dysfunctional RCAVFs.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of death and patency after application of paclitaxel-coated balloons in the hemodialysis access

OBJECTIVE

The comparison between paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty and plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) for hemodialysis (HD) access stenosis or occlusion has not been well investigated. The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare all-cause mortality, HD access primary patency, and circuit primary patency after endovascular maintenance procedures using PCB angioplasty vs PBA.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Databases were systematically searched to identify all the relevant studies on paclitaxel-coated devices for stenosis or thrombosis of HD access. A random effects model was applied to pool the effect measures. Dichotomous data were presented using an odds ratio (OR). Effect data were presented using pooled hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included in this meta-analysis, 12 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohort studies involving 1086 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for HD access stenosis or occlusion. All-cause mortality rates at 6, 12, and 24 months after intervention were similar between the PCB and PBA groups (6 months: OR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.38-2.96; P = .907; I² = 19.2%]; 12 months: OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.66-2.16; P = .554; I² = 0%]; 24 months: OR, 1.43 [95% CI, 0.83-2.45; P = .195; I² = 0%]). There was a significant improvement of primary patency in the PCB group compared with the PBA group (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.69; P < .001; I² = 67.3%). This benefit was consistent with the analysis of randomized controlled trials, whereas cohort studies were excluded. Further subgroup analysis of target lesions demonstrated that primary patency was significantly higher in the PCB group than in the PBA group, not only for arteriovenous fistula (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.98; P = .041; I² = 76.8%) but also for central venous stenosis (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.22-0.71; P = .002; I² = 0%). The PCB group was associated with higher 6-month (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.27-0.59; P < .001) and 24-month lesion primary patency (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11-0.72; P = .009) than PBA and was marginally associated with 12-month lesion primary patency (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.26-1.03; P = .06). Circuit primary patency analysis showed a marginal trend toward better outcome in the PCB group (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40-1.00) but no statistical significance (P = .052).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that PCB angioplasty is associated with significantly improved primary patency of arteriovenous fistula and central venous stenosis for HD access maintenance, with no evidence of increasing all-cause mortality based on short-term and midterm follow-up. Further large cohort study is needed to investigate long-term mortality.

Drug-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty of hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula or graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Restenosis remains a significant problem in endovascular therapy for hemodialysis vascular access. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty decreases restenosis in peripheral and coronary artery diseases. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the patency outcomes following DCB angioplasty, as compared to conventional balloon (CB) angioplasty for the stenosis of hemodialysis vascular access.

Methods

A comprehensive search in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases was conducted in order to identify eligible randomized controlled trials evaluating DCB angioplasty for hemodialysis vascular access dysfunction. The primary endpoint was the 6-month target lesion primary patency and the secondary endpoints were 12-month target lesion primary patency and procedure-related complications. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled and relevant subgroups were analyzed separately.

Results

Eleven randomized controlled trials comprised of 487 patients treated with DCB angioplasty and 489 patients treated with CB angioplasty were included. There were no significant differences in the target lesion primary patency at 6 months [RR, 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.56, 1.01; p = 0.06] and at 12 months (RR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79, 1.00; p = 0.06). The absence of benefit for the DCB group remained, even in the arteriovenous fistula subgroup or the subgroup of studies excluding central vein stenosis. The risk of procedure-related complication did not differ between the two groups (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.98, 1.02; p = 0.95).

Conclusion

DCB angioplasty did not demonstrate significant patency benefit for the treatment of hemodialysis vascular access dysfunction. Wide variations in patency outcomes across studies were noted. Further studies focusing on specific types of access or lesions are warranted to clarify the value of DCB for hemodialysis vascular access. (PROSPERO Number CRD42019119938)

Predictors of primary patency after percutaneous balloon angioplasty for stenosis of Brescia-Cimino hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula

OBJECTIVE

Percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty (PTA) is recommended as the first choice to treat stenosis of Brescia-Cimino arteriovenous fistulas (B-C AVFs). The ability to predict which B-C AVFs are at risk for recurrent stenosis post-PTA would allow closer monitoring of patients, and possibly result in surgical intervention rather than repeat PTA. The purpose of this study was to identify predictive factors of primary patency after PTA in B-C AVFs.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with B-C AVF primary stenosis and treated by PTA between November 2013 and March 2018 were included in the study. Patient and stenotic lesion characteristics and PTA procedure factors were included in the analysis. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the primary patency rate. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to identify factors predictive of decreased primary patency.

RESULTS

74 patients (35 males, 39 females) with a mean age of 61.68 ± 11.44 years (range, 36-84 years) were included in the study. The mean B-C AVF age was 16.34 ± 12.93 months (range, 2-84 months), and the median primary patency time was 7.79 ± 0.48 months. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis revealed stenosis location at the inflow artery [hazard ratio (HR)=3.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.46-10.09] or anastomosis (HR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.09-3.32), dilation >2 times during PTA (HR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.22-4.34), and residual stenosis >30% (HR = 2.42, 95% CI: 1.26-4.63) were significantly associated with decreased patency.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the primary patency rate of PTA for B-C AVF dysfunction is reduced by dilation >2 times, residual stenosis >30%, and stenosis located at the inflow artery or anastomosis. These results may help in tailoring surveillance programs, multiple PTA, or a proximal re-anastomosis surgery in patients with AVF dysfunction.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

A number of studies have been conducted to examine the predictors of primary patency after PTA, however, no definitive conclusions have been reached. Our study revealed that stenosis location at the inflow artery or anastomosis, dilation >2 times during PTA, and residual stenosis >30% were the predictors of primary patency after PTA, which may help in tailoring surveillance programs, multiple PTA, or a proximal re-anastomosis surgery in patients with arteriovenous fistulas dysfunction.

Comparative Effectiveness of Drug-Coated Balloon vs Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Arteriovenous Fistula Stenosis: A Meta-analysis

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety outcomes of drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCBA) vs conventional balloon angioplasty (BA) for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) stenosis. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted of PubMed and Embase databases from 1966 to May 2019 to identify English-language articles evaluating DCBA vs BA for the treatment of AVF stenosis. Data extracted from each study were synthesized to evaluate target lesion revascularization (TLR), technical success, and mortality for the 2 approaches. Meta-analyses were performed on these outcomes using random effects models to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Twelve studies [6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6 cohort studies] comprising 979 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that AVFs treated with DCBA had significantly fewer TLRs at 6 months (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.69, p=0.004) and 12 months (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.97, p=0.04) than BA. The 2 approaches had similar technical success rates (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.43, p=0.11). Additionally, the pooled OR of 12-month mortality was 0.71 (95% CI 0.20 to 2.51, p=0.60), indicating no significant difference between DCBA and BA. Subgroup analysis based on study design showed the superiority of DCBA to BA in cohort studies but not RCTs, which had high heterogeneity. Significant publication bias was found in the cohort studies. Conclusion: In de novo or recurrent AVF stenosis, DCBA appears to be an effective procedure associated with lower 6- and 12-month TLR compared with BA. However, larger and randomized controlled studies are warranted to draw definitive conclusions.

A retrospective comparison analysis of results of drug-coated balloon versus plain balloon angioplasty in treatment of juxta-anastomotic de novo stenosis of radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas

BACKGROUND

Juxta-anastomotic stenosis is a common issue of arteriovenous fistulas. We aimed to evaluate the results of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with drug-coated balloon versus plain balloon for the treatment of juxta-anastomotic stenoses of mature but failing distal radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas.

METHODS

A total of 80 patients with a juxta-anastomotic stenosis of distal radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula in our clinic between January 2016 and September 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of treatment as drug-coated balloon - percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (n = 44) and plain balloon - percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (n = 43). Intra- and post-procedural data were recorded. Target lesion primary patency rate was evaluated at 6 and 12 months. Of all patients, 48 were females and 39 were males with a mean age of 56.3 ± 10.4 (range, 24-75) years. Both groups had mature fistulas, and the mean age of fistula was 11.3 ± 9.1 months in the drug-coated balloon - percutaneous transluminal angioplasty group and 10.3 ± 8.8 months in the plain balloon - percutaneous transluminal angioplasty group (p = 0.24).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the target lesion stenosis rate and the median lesion length between the groups. Technical and clinical success were achieved in both groups. Target lesion primary patency was similar at 6 months between the two groups (93.1% vs 81.3%, respectively; p = 0.14) but significantly higher for the drug-coated balloon - percutaneous transluminal angioplasty group at 12 months (81.8% vs 51.1%, respectively; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our study results suggest that the use of drug-coated balloon combined with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty is an effective treatment for juxta-anastomotic stenoses of mature but failing distal radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas with significantly improved target lesion primary patency rates and reduced need for juxta-anastomotic reinterventions.