ISAR-PEBIS (Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon Versus Conventional Balloon Angioplasty for In-Stent Restenosis of Superficial Femoral Artery): A Randomized Trial

Rivaroxaban and Aspirin in Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

After drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment of the femoropopliteal artery in-stent restenosis (ISR), a certain proportion of patients also experience target lesion restenosis. The purpose of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban combined with aspirin in the treatment of ISR after DCB intervention.

METHODS

Patients who underwent DCB treatment for ISR after femoropopliteal artery intervention at our center from March 2017 to February 2022 were included consecutively. According to the drug treatment after DCB intervention of ISR, the patients were divided into rivaroxaban and aspirin group (RA Group) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) group. The outcomes of 2 groups during the 12-month follow-up after DCB intervention were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients were included in final analysis, with 43 in RA group and 49 in DAPT group. During 12-month follow-up, a total of 15 cases of recurrent ISR were detected, and the recurrence rate of ISR and clinically driven target lesion revascularization in the RA group were lower than those in the DAPT group (P < 0.05). The vascular patency rate in the RA group was higher than that in the DAPT group at 6 and 12 months of follow-up (P < 0.05). During the follow-up, there were no adverse events such as death, myocardial infarction, stroke, amputation, or major bleeding, and only a total of 5 cases of minor bleeding occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the standard DAPT regimen, rivaroxaban combined with aspirin can safely improve the follow-up outcome after DCB for femoropopliteal ISR.

Comparison of Different Endovascular Treatments of Femoropopliteal Artery In-Stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) sought to evaluate the efficacy of different endovascular treatments for femoropopliteal artery in-stent restenosis (FP-ISR).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of science for clinical trials from database inception to March 31, 2023, with no language restrictions to retrieve randomized controlled trials or cohort studies evaluating the impact of any kind of endovascular treatments for FP-ISR. Pair-wise meta-analysis and Bayesian NMA were performed to pool the outcome estimates different endovascular treatments. The primary end points under consideration were primary patency rates at both 6-month and 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies with 1,424 patients were ultimately enrolled to be analyzed, 7 types of endovascular treatment were identified for comparison. In terms of primary patency and freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 6-month and12-month follow-up, the direct meta-analysis findings showed that drug-coated balloons (DCB) and covered stent (CS) are considerably superior to plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), Excimer laser atherectomy (ELA) + DCB is significantly better than DCB. According to the meta-analysis based on Bayesian theory, during the 6-month and 12-months follow-up, we could not find significant difference between the different treatments in terms of the primary patency and the freedom from TLR, based on the surface values under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), CS was considered the best treatment in terms of primary patency (6 months SUCRA = 85.2; 12 months SUCRA = 78.9) and freedom from TLR (6 months SUCRA = 84.9; 12 months SUCRA = 70.9); directional atherectomy + POBA may lead to higher survival rate at 12 months (SUCRA = 89.1) than others treatments; in addition, both ELA + POBA and ELA + DCB have higher limb salvage than POBA.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this NMA suggest that CS showed positive encouraging results in primary patency and TLR in FP-ISR at 6 and 12 months. However, due to the potential influence of certain confounding factors, the long-term results necessitate validation through numerous randomized controlled trials.

Network Meta-Analysis of All Available Regimens Based on Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty and Laser Atherectomy for Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis

PURPOSE

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and laser atherectomy (LA) have been frequently utilized to treat femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR); however, no studies have concurrently compared available regimens, including DCB, LA+DCB, and LA + plain balloon angioplasty (PB). Therefore, we conducted this network meta-analysis to determine whether there were significant differences in outcomes among these regimens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing DCB or LA-based regimes with POBA or each other for treating femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR) from their inception until March 2021. The primary outcome measure was binary restenosis, and secondary outcome measures were target lesion revascularization (TLR) and mortality, evaluated at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed using Aggregate Data Drug Information System (ADDIS) 1.4 software, and all data were graphically summarized using Microsoft Excel software.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 11 studies, of which 6 studies compared DCB with PB, 2 studies compared PB vs LA+PB, 2 studies compared DCB vs LA+DCB, and 1 study compared LA+DCB with LA+PB. DCB was better than PB in decreasing binary restenosis at 6 (odds ratio [OR]: 0.22, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.04-0.91) and 12 (OR: 0.26, 95% CrI: 0.12-0.50) months. DCB was associated with lower TLR than PB at 6 months (OR: 0.31, 95% CrI: 0.13-0.69). LA+DCB was also superior to PB in treating binary restenosis at 12 months (OR: 6.10, 95% CrI: 1.94-24.41) and TLR at 6 months (OR: 5.32, 95% CrI: 1.43-28.06). There was no statistical difference in mortality between PB, DCB, and LA+PB. DCB and LA+DCB were the first 2 options for reducing binary restenosis and TLR.

CONCLUSION

The current network meta-analysis demonstrates that both DCB and LA+DCB are superior to PB alone, and that DCB and LA+DCB may be the preferred treatment options for reducing binary restenosis and TLR.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The treatment for femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains challenging clinical practice. One important reason is that no optimal treatment strategy was available. Drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCB) and laser atherectomy (LA) have been extensively utilized to treat ISR; however, different combinations of these treatments further confused the clinicians' choices. This network meta-analysis systematically investigated the difference between the currently available treatments regarding therapeutic effects and safety, indicating that DCB and LA+DCB may be the optimal treatment for decreasing the risk of binary restenosis and target lesion revascularization. The results of the current network meta-analysis help to resolve the confusion of clinicians in making the decision.

A registry-based study of paclitaxel drug-coated balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis of the femoral-popliteal artery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report the results of a prospective, single-arm, registry-based study assessing the safety and performance of a paclitaxel drug-coated balloon (DCB) for the treatment of superficial femoral artery (SFA) or popliteal artery in-stent restenosis (ISR) in a United States population.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, non-randomized, multi-center, single-arm, post-market registry of the IN.PACT Admiral DCB for the treatment of ISR lesions in the SFA or popliteal artery at 43 sites within the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Registry from December 2016 to January 2020. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 12, 24, and 36 months. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included technical success, target vessel revascularization, major limb amputation, and all-cause mortality. Results are presented as survival probabilities based on Kaplan-Meier survival estimates.

RESULTS

Patients (N = 300) were 58% male, with a mean age of 68 ± 10 years. Diabetes was present in 56%, 80% presented with claudication, and 20% with rest pain. Lesions included ISR of the SFA in 68%, SFA-popliteal in 26%, and popliteal arteries in 7%. The mean lesion length was 17.8 ± 11.8 cm. Lesions were categorized as occlusions in 43% (mean occluded length, 16 ± 10 cm). TASC type was A (17%), B (29%), C (38%), and D (15%). Technical success was 99%. Re-stenting was performed in 5% and thrombolysis in 0.6% of patients. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from target lesion revascularization were 90%, 72%, and 62% at 12, 24, and 36 months. Freedom from target vessel revascularization was 88%, 68%, and 59% and freedom from major target limb amputation was 99.6%, 98.9%, and 98.9%, respectively, at 12, 24, and 36 months. Survival was 95%, 89%, and 85% at 12, 24, and 36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This post-market registry-based study shows promising results in treating femoral-popliteal ISR with paclitaxel DCB in comparison to the results of plain balloon angioplasty reported in the literature. These results demonstrate the ability of the SVS VQI to conduct post-market evaluation of peripheral devices in partnership with industry and federal regulators.

Robustness of Longitudinal Safety and Efficacy After Paclitaxel-Based Endovascular Therapy for Treatment of Femoro-Popliteal Artery Occlusive Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were: i) to assess fragility indices (FIs) of individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared paclitaxel-based drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus standard endovascular devices, and ii) to meta-analyze mid-term and long-term safety and efficacy outcomes from available RCT data while also estimating the FI of pooled results.

METHODS

This systematic review has been registered in the PROSPERO public database (CRD42022304326 http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). A query of PubMed (Medline), EMBASE (Excerpta Medical Database), Scopus, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases was performed to identify eligible RCTs. Rates of primary patency (PP) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were assessed as efficacy outcomes, while lower limb amputation (LLA) consisting of major amputation that is. below or above the knee and all-cause mortality were estimated as safety outcomes. All outcomes were pooled with a random effects model to account for any clinical and study design heterogeneity. The analyses were performed by dividing the RCTs according to their maximal follow-up length (mid-term was defined as results up to 2-3 years, while long-term was defined as results up to 4-5 years). For each individual outcome, the FI and reverse fragility index (RFI) were calculated according to whether the outcome results were statistically significant or not, respectively. The fragility quotient (FQ) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ), which are the FI or RFI divided by the sample size, were also calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 2,337 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. There were 2 RCTs examining DES devices and 14 RCTs evaluating different DCBs. For efficacy outcomes, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy increased the PP rate and reduced the TLR rate at mid-term, with a calculated pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.66 for patency (95% CI, 1.55-1.86; P < 0.001), with a corresponding number needed-to-treat (NNT) of 3 patients (95% CI, 2.9-3.8) and RR of 0.44 for TLR (95% CI, 0.35-0.54; P = 0.027), respectively. Similarly, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy both increased PP and decreased TLR rates at long-term, with calculated pooled RR values of 1.73 (95% CI, 1.12-2.61; P = 0.004) and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.45-0.62; P = 0.82), respectively. For safety outcomes, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy increased all-cause mortality at mid-term, with a calculated pooled RR of 2.05 (95% CI, 1.21-3.24). However, there was no difference between treatment arms in LLA at mid-term (95% CI, 0.1-2.7; P = 0.68). Similarly, neither all-cause mortality nor LLA at long-term differed between treatment arms, with a calculated pooled RR of 0.66, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.31-3.42) and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.30-5.21; P = 0.22), respectively. The pooled estimates of PP at mid-term were robust (FI = 28 and FQ = 1.9%) as were pooled rates of TLR (FI = 18 and FQ = 0.9%). However, when safety outcomes were analyzed, the robustness of the meta-analysis decreased significantly. In fact, the relationship between the use of paclitaxel-coated devices and all-cause mortality at mid-term showed very low robustness (FI = 4 and FQ = 0.2%). At 5 years, only the benefit of paclitaxel-based devices to reduce TLR remained robust, with an FI of 32 and an FQ of 3.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

The data supporting clinical efficacy endpoints of RCTs that examined paclitaxel-based devices in the treatment of femoral-popliteal arterial occlusive disease were robust; however, the pooled safety endpoints were highly fragile and prone to bias due to loss of patient follow-up in the original studies. These findings should be considered in the ongoing debate concerning the safety of paclitaxel-based devices.

A Bayesian network meta-analysis for acute thrombosis after lower extremity artery endovascular treatment

BACKGROUND

Various endovascular treatment devices have been widely used in the lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD). Their patency efficiency for target lesions has been well studied and reported. Comparison of the risk of acute thrombosis events between the different endovascular treatment devices is unclear.

AIMS

To rank the risk of acute thrombosis events when bare metal stents (BMSs), covered stents (CSs), drug-eluting stents (DESs), drug-coated balloons (DCBs), and conventional percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty (PTA) are used to treat LEAD through Bayesian network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the risk of 1-year postoperative acute thrombosis between BMSs, CSs, DESs, DCBs, and PTA for treating LEAD. Bayesian random models were used for pooled endovascular treatment modality comparisons. We ranked these treatment modalities via the Bayesian method according to their surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) and estimated probabilities.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (38 study arms; 2758 patients) were included. The Bayesian network ranking of treatments indicated that DCB had the lowest risk of acute thrombosis, PTA had the second-lowest risk of thrombosis, and CS, BMS, and DES had the highest risk of thrombosis. Regarding the treatment efficacy, the OR values of the loss of primary patency were significantly lower for DCB (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.30-0.62), DES (OR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.14-0.94), and CS (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.18,0.56) than for PTA. When BMS was used as a reference, only the OR for CS was significantly lower (OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.21-0.82). Correspondingly, the Bayesian ranking of treatments from better to worse target lesion primary patency was CS, DES, DCB, BMS, and PTA.

CONCLUSION

With the available research evidence and according to the network analysis ranking, DES appears to have the highest risk of acute thrombosis and DCB appears to have the lowest risk.

Safety of paclitaxel-coated devices in the femoropopliteal arteries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Clinical benefit of paclitaxel-coated devices for patients with peripheral arterial disease has been confirmed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A meta-analysis published in 2018 identified late mortality risk over a long follow-up period due to use of paclitaxel-coated devices in the femoropopliteal arteries, which caused enormous controversy and debates globally. This study aims to further evaluate the safety of paclitaxel-coated devices by incorporating the most recently published data.

Methods

We searched for candidate studies in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, EMBASE (Ovid) online databases, government web archives and international cardiovascular conferences. Safety endpoints of interest included all-cause mortality rates at one, two and five years and the risk ratio (RR) was used as the summary measure. The primary analysis was performed using random-effects models to account for potential clinical heterogeneity.

Findings

Thirty-nine RCTs including 9164 patients were identified. At one year, the random-effects model yielded a pooled RR of 1.06 (95% CI [0.87, 1.29]) indicating no difference in short-term all-cause deaths between the paclitaxel and control groups (crude mortality, 4.3%, 214/5025 versus 4.5%, 177/3965). Two-year mortality was reported in 26 RCTs with 382 deaths out of 3788 patients (10.1%) in the paclitaxel arm and 299 out of 2955 patients (10.1%) in the control arm and no association was found between increased risk of death and usage of paclitaxel-coated devices (RR 1.08, 95% CI [0.93, 1.25]). Eight RCTs recorded all-cause deaths up to five years and a pooled RR of 1.18 (95% CI [0.92, 1.51]) demonstrated no late mortality risk due to use of paclitaxel-coated devices (crude mortality, paclitaxel 18.2%, 247/1360 versus control 15.2%, 122/805).

Conclusions

We found no significant difference in either short- or long-term all-cause mortalities between patients receiving paclitaxel-coated and uncoated devices. Further research on the longer-term safety of paclitaxel usage (e.g., 8- or 10-year) is warranted.

Registration

PROSPERO, CRD42021246291.

The Diagnostic Value of Circulating Biomarkers and Role of Drug-Coated Balloons for In-Stent Restenosis in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is an increasingly pathological condition that commonly affects the femoropopliteal arteries. The current fashionable treatment is percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), often with stenting. However, the in-stent restenosis (ISR) rate after the stenting of the femoropopliteal (FP) district remains high. Many techniques have been proposed for the treatment of femoropopliteal ISR, such as intravascular brachytherapy, laser atherectomy, second stenting and drug-coated balloons angioplasty (DCB). DCB showed a significantly lower rate of restenosis and target lesions revascularization (TLR) compared to conventional PTA. However, further studies and multi-center RCTs with dedicated long-term follow-up are needed to verify the true efficiency of this approach. Nowadays, the correlation between PAD and inflammation biomarkers is well known. Multiple studies have shown that proinflammatory markers (such as C-reactive proteins) and the high plasma levels of microRNA could predict the outcomes after stent placement. In particular, circulating microRNA-320a, microRNA-3937, microRNA-642a-3p and microRNA-572 appear to hold promise in diagnosing ISR in patients with PAD, but also as predictors of stent patency. This narrative review intends to summarize the current knowledge on the value of circulating biomarkers as predictors of ISR and to foster the scientific debate on the advantages of using DCB in the treatment of ISR in the FP district.

Paclitaxel-Coated versus Uncoated Balloon for Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Several prospective controlled trials to date have assessed the safety and efficacy of paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty (PCBA) versus uncoated balloon angioplasty (UCBA) for femoropopliteal (FP) in-stent restenosis (ISR). Therefore, this meta-analysis of prospective controlled trials aimed to summarize the results of these trials and present reliable conclusions.

Methods

We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CNKI databases for prospective randomized controlled trials (published between January 1, 2008, and July 31, 2021; no language restrictions) comparing PCBA with UCBA in the management of FP ISR. The main endpoints were recurrent restenosis, primary patency, freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR), clinical improvement, ankle-brachial index (ABI), and major adverse events (MAEs). We assessed the pooled data using a fixed effects model.

Results

Of the 206 identified studies, seven were eligible and included in our analysis (N = 593 participants). Compared with UCBA, PCBA yielded a reduction in recurrent restenosis (odds ratio [OR], 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.38), a better primary patency (OR, 3.59; 95% CI, 1.72-7.47), an improved likelihood of freedom from TLR (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.36-5.35), greater clinical improvement (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.50-3.79), and a similar mean difference in ABI (0.02; 95% CI, -0.11-0.14) and OR in MAEs (0.71; 95% CI, 0.24-2.14).

Conclusions

PCBA as a treatment strategy can achieve better short-term outcomes of FP ISR management, including potent recurrent restenosis-lowering and symptom-improving capacity without increased MAEs. Therefore, it is a promising therapeutic strategy for patients with FP ISR.

Systematic Review Registration

This work was registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (number: CRD42021261574).

Endovascular Treatment and Outcomes for Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis: Insights from the XLPAD Registry

Background

There is limited “real-world” evidence examining treatment modalities and outcomes in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease undergoing endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal (FP) in-stent restenosis (ISR).

Materials and Methods

We compared outcomes in 2,895 patients from the XLPAD registry (NCT01904851) between 2006 and 2019 treated for FP ISR (n = 347) and non-ISR (n = 2,548) lesions. Primary endpoint included major adverse limb events (MALE) at 1 year, a composite of all-cause death, target limb repeat revascularization, or major amputation.

Results

ISR patients were more frequently on antiplatelet (94.5% vs 89.4%, p=0.007) and statin (68.9% vs 60.3%, p=0.003) therapies. Lesion length was similar (ISR: 145 ± 99 mm vs. non-ISR: 142 ± 99 mm, p=0.55). Fewer treated ISR lesions were chronic total occlusions (47.3% vs. 53.7%, p=0.02) and severely calcified (22.4% vs. 44.7%, p < 0.001). Atherectomy (63.5% vs. 45.0%, p < 0.001) and drug-coated balloons (DCB; 4.7% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.001) were more frequently used in ISR lesions. The distal embolization rate was higher in ISR lesions (2.4% vs. 0.9%, p=0.02). Repeat revascularization (21.5% vs. 16.7%, p=0.04; Figure) was higher and freedom from MALE at 1 year was significantly lower (87% vs. 92.5%, p < 0.001) in the ISR group.

Conclusion

Atherectomy and DCB are more frequently used to treat FP ISR lesions. Patients with FP ISR have more intraprocedural distal embolization, higher repeat revascularization procedures, and lower freedom from MALE at 1 year.

Diabetes mellitus and femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis

Summary: Background: The influence of diabetes mellitus (DM) on recurrent in-stent restenosis (ISR) of femoropopliteal arteries remains understudied. We investigated whether DM has an impact on recurrent restenosis after femoropopliteal stenting in patients included in the dRug-coatEd balloon angioPlasty for femoropopliteAl In-stent Restenosis (REPAIR) cooperation. Patients and methods: The REPAIR cooperation pooled the patient-level data from 3 randomized trials in which patients with ISR of femoropopliteal arteries received either drug-coated balloon (DCB) or plain balloon angioplasty. For this analysis, patients were divided in two groups based on whether they had or had not a DM diagnosis at the time of enrollment. The primary outcome was target lesion revascularization (TLR). The main secondary outcome was recurrent ISR. Other outcomes of interest were death, Rutherford class improvement and ankle-brachial index at follow-up. Results: 256 patients (DM, n=99 vs. non-DM, n=157) with 12-month follow-up were included in the analysis. Compared to non-DM patients, DM patients displayed no difference in terms of TLR [adjusted hazard ratio (95% Confidence intervals): 0.96 (0.55, 1.69), p=0.89] and recurrent ISR [1.04 (0.61, 1.77), p=0.88], whilst mortality was higher [9.38 (1.06, 83.11), p=0.044]. There were no differences between groups with respect to other secondary outcomes. The percutaneous treatment with DCB as compared to plain balloon angioplasty significantly reduced the risk of TLR and recurrent ISR without an excess risk of death irrespective of DM (p for interaction ≥0.70). Conclusions: In patients with femoropopliteal ISR, diabetes has a neutral effect on the risk of recurrence, but increases mortality at 12-month follow-up. DCB as compared to plain balloon angioplasty is associated with superior efficacy without trade-off in safety, regardless of diabetes.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes of drug eluting stent versus drug coated balloon angioplasty for lower extremity peripheral artery diseases

OBJECTIVES

Recent evidence raised the concern that paclitaxel-containing therapy was associated with increased risk of mortality in patients with peripheral artery diseases (PAD). However, it is unclear whether drug-eluting stent (DES) versus drug-coated balloon (DCB) have different effect on mortality of PAD patients. Our study aimed to systematically review current literature comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated with DES versus DCB for PAD.

METHODS

Medline and Embase were searched for eligible studies from January 2000 to December 31^st, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) or cohort studies that reported outcomes of DES versus DCB were included in our study. The primary outcome was 12-month all-cause mortality. Random-effect model was used to pool the odds ratios (OR) and related 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Our review included seven studies, involving two RCTs and five cohort studies. A total of 4237 patients with DES and 9234 patients with DCB were analyzed. All included cohort studies were high-quality with Newcastle-Ottawa scores from 7 to 8. No significant difference in 12-month all-cause mortality was found between DES and DCB without significant heterogeneity (OR 1.02, 95%CI 0.91-1.14, I²=0%). As for primary patency, no significant difference between treatments was observed (OR 1.27, 95%CI 0.75-2.15, I²=55%). Similar results were observed for freedom from target lesion revascularization (OR 0.94, 95%CI 0.64-1.40, I²=0%).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that no significant difference in 12-month all-cause mortality was found between DES and DCB. Primary patency and freedom from target lesion revascularization of lower extremity PAD were also comparable between the two groups.

The safety and efficacy of different endovascular treatments for in-stent restenosis of the femoropopliteal artery: A network meta-analysis

Purpose: Femoropopliteal artery in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a challenging treatment. We performed a network meta-analysis (NWM) for femoropopliteal artery ISR to explore the safety and efficacy of endovascular therapeutic strategies. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were used as data sources. The network meta-analysis (NWM) approach used random-effects models based on the frequentist framework. We compared technical success rate, primary patency, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major amputation at the 12-month follow-up for femoropopliteal artery ISR. Results: In total, 14 eligible studies (10 prospective and four retrospective; 1348 patients; and eight treatment modalities - standard balloon angioplasty (SBA), drug-coated balloon (DCB), peripheral cutting balloon angioplasty (PCBA), Viabahn endoprosthesis (VBE), directional atherectomy (DA), excimer laser atherectomy (ELA), and combinations - were included. The primary patency rates (at 6 months) were significantly higher for DCB and ELA+DCB than for SBA and ELA+SBA. ELA+DCB had higher primary patency rates (at 12 months) than ELA+SBA and SBA. The technical success rates were significantly lower for DCB and SBA than for VBE. The major amputation rates were significantly lower for ELA+DCB than for DCB. Based on the surface values under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), ELA+DCB was considered the best treatment in terms of primary patency at 6 months (SUCRA = 91.1), primary patency at 12 months (SUCRA = 82.3), and TLR (SUCRA = 83.4). Conclusion: ELA+DCB showed positive encouraging results in primary patency (6, 12 months), TLR, and major amputation in femoropopliteal ISR. The efficacy and safety of ELA+DCB are worthy of further investigation. (PROSPERO Registration No.: CRD42021246674).

Catheter based interventions for lower extremity peripheral artery disease

The field of peripheral arterial intervention has exploded over the past 20 years. Current knowledge includes a growing evidence base for treatment as well as a myriad of new interventional approaches to complex disease. This review seeks to outline the current state of the art for interventional approaches to lower extremity peripheral arterial disease.

Percutaneous Mechanical Atherectomy Plus Thrombectomy Using the Rotarex®S Device Followed by a Drug-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of Femoropopliteal Artery In-stent Restenosis: A Prospective Single-Center, Single-Arm Efficacy Trial (PERMIT-ISR Trial)

Background: Studies investigating debulking devices with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in the treatment of femoropopliteal (FP) artery in-stent restenosis (ISR) are limited. We aimed to evaluate the safety and midterm outcome of percutaneous mechanical atherectomy plus thrombectomy (MATH) using the Rotarex®S (Straub Medical, Wangs, Switzerland) catheter followed by a DCB in the treatment of FP-ISR.

Methods: This study was a single-center single-arm trial. Patients with symptomatic (Rutherford category 2–5) de novo restenosis lesions of FP-ISR were treated with MATH and subsequent DCB. From June 2016 to May 2018, 59 patients with FP-ISR were enrolled. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) and changes in the Rutherford category of the target limb at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included primary and secondary patency at 12 months, technical success rate, major adverse events, and ankle-brachial index (ABI). Risk factors for TLR were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard model.

Results: The average follow-up time was 33 ± 8 months. The rate of technical success was 88.1% (52/59). Nine patients received bailout stenting. The rate of freedom from TLR was 84.7% (50/59) at 1 year, the Rutherford category changed at 12 months were significantly improved from baseline (p < 0.01). The primary patency rates and the secondary patency at the 12-month follow-ups were 82.5 and 92.5%, respectively. The ABI changed at 12 months were significantly improved from baseline (p < 0.01). Global limb anatomic staging system (GLASS) classification III [hazard ratio (HR) 18.44, 95% CI (1.57–215.99), p = 0.020] and postoperative Rutherford classification ≥4 [HR 8.28, 95% CI (1.85–37.06), p = 0.006] were identified as independent predictors of TLR.

Conclusion: Our preliminary data suggested that MATH using a Rotarex®S catheter combined with DCB angioplasty is a safe, minimally invasive, and effective treatment for FP-ISR with favorable, immediate, and midterm outcomes.

Clinical Trial Registration:http://www.chictr.org.cn, identifier [ChiCTR2000041380].

Paclitaxel Exposure and Dosage of Drug-coated Devices for the Treatment of Femoropopliteal Peripheral Artery Disease

The role of paclitaxel in the treatment of femoropopliteal peripheral arterial disease is currently ambiguous. A summary-level meta-analysis of randomised trials published in 2018 demonstrated that paclitaxel-coated devices were associated with an increased all-cause mortality in those who underwent treatment at 2 years and 5 years. Further evaluation has been undertaken to establish whether there is a specific dose response, mechanism or reproducible signal. At this time, there has been no confirmation of dose response, as was initially asserted by the summary-level meta-analysis. No mechanism of harm has been identified. Although an association with increased mortality has been confirmed by patient-level meta-analysis, the strength of the signal has been inconsistent. The information suggests there is only an association between paclitaxel-coated devices and increased all-cause mortality, not causation. The authors encourage additional studies designed to follow long-term results after treatment with paclitaxel-coated devices, using real patient data, before a conclusion can be made.

Mortality Rates After Paclitaxel-Coated Device Use in Patients With Occlusive Femoropopliteal Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

A late increased mortality risk has been reported in a summary level meta-analysis of patients with femoropopliteal artery occlusive disease treated with paclitaxel-coated angioplasty balloons and stents. However, at the longer follow up timepoints that analysis was limited by small trial numbers and few participants. The aim of this study was to report an updated summary level risk of all-cause mortality after treatment with paclitaxel-coated devices in that same patient group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to investigate the mortality outcomes associated with paclitaxel-coated devices used to treat patients with occlusive disease of femoropopliteal arteries (last search date December 10, 2020). The single primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 34 randomized controlled trials (7654 patients; 84% intermittent claudication). There were 622 deaths among 4147 (15.0%) subjects in the paclitaxel device group and 475 deaths among 3507 (13.5%) subjects in the noncoated control group [relative risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.20, p=0.20, I²=0%). All-cause mortality was similar between groups at 12 months (34 studies, 7654 patients; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22, p=0.94, I²=0%), 24 months (20 studies, 3799 patients; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.55, p=0.31, I²=0%), and 60 months (9 studies, 2288 patients; RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.45, p=0.08, I²=0%).

CONCLUSION

This updated meta-analysis with included additional trials and larger patient numbers shows no evidence of increased risk of all-cause mortality in patients treated with paclitaxel-coated devices, compared with uncoated devices for femoropopliteal disease at all time points to 60 months. There is therefore no justification to limit their use, or alter regulatory body follow-up recommendations in this patient population.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

CRD42020216140.

Benefits with drug-coated balloon as compared to a conventional revascularization strategy for the treatment of coronary and non-coronary arterial disease: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 45 randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have shown promising results for the percutaneous treatment of de novo and restenotic lesions, involving both the coronary and femoropopliteal district. However, clinical outcomes data associated with the use of this devices are still unclear, with potential warnings on increased mortality being raised from initial studies. We aimed at performing an updated and comprehensive meta-analysis comparing DCB with conventional percutaneous revascularization strategies for the treatment of coronary (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD).

METHODS

Literature and main scientific session abstracts were searched for studies comparing DCB vs a standard percutaneous revascularization strategy, with or without stenting, for the treatment of CAD and PAD. The primary efficacy endpoint was mortality. Secondary endpoints were recurrent acute ischemic events (myocardial infarction or amputation) or target lesion revascularization (TLR).

RESULTS

We included 45 randomized trials, (CAD: 27 studies, PAD: 18 studies) with an overall population of 7718 patients, (56.4%) randomized to a DCB strategy. At a mean follow-up of19.3 ± 15.2 months, death occurred in 5.8% of the patients, with no significant difference between DCB or conventionally treated patients (5.9% vs 5.7%, OR[95%CI] = 0.89[0.71,1.11], p = 0.31; phet = 0.43). We observed a non-significant reduction in recurrent acute ischemic events, whereas the use of DCB significantly reduced the rate of TLR, with larger benefits observed in patients with PAD and respect to balloon-only angioplasty, while being lower in comparison with stent implantation. No significant interaction was observed with de novo lesions or in-stent restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current meta-analysis, the use of drug-coated balloons for the percutaneous treatment of CAD and PAD is associated to a comparable risk of mortality and recurrent acute ischemic events as compared to a conventional revascularization strategy, although offering larger benefits in terms of TLR, especially when compared with balloon-only angioplasty and in femoropopliteal disease.

Successful Peripheral Vascular Intervention in Patients with High-risk Comorbidities or Lesion Characteristics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Certain comorbidities and lesion characteristics are associated with increased risk for procedural complications, limb events, and cardiovascular events following peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of high-risk modifiable and unmodifiable patient characteristics and its relative impact on clinical outcomes such as amputation risk and mortality. Furthermore, general approaches to potentially mitigating these risks through pre-intervention planning and use of modern devices and techniques are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Diabetes, tobacco use, and older age remain strong risk factors for the development of peripheral arterial disease. Recent data highlight the significant risk of polyvascular disease on major limb and cardiac events in advanced PAD, and ongoing studies are assessing this risk specifically after PVI. Challenging lesion characteristics such as calcified disease and chronic total occlusions can be successfully treated with PVI by utilizing novel devices (e.g., intravascular lithotripsy, re-entry devices) and techniques (e.g., subintimal arterial "flossing" with antegrade-retrograde intervention). Understanding high-risk patient comorbidities and lesion characteristics will improve our ability to counsel and manage patients with advanced PAD. Continued device innovation and novel techniques will aid in procedural planning for successful interventions to improve clinical outcomes.

Drug-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of Femoropopliteal Tosaka Class III In-stent Restenosis Lesions

Background: To date, there have been few studies examining the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty in the treatment of Tosaka class III in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions in the clinical setting. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of DCBs in patients with Tosaka class III ISR femoropopliteal lesions. Methods: This single-center study enrolled 28 femoropopliteal ISR Tosaka III patients who were treated by DCB angioplasty from September 2016 to September 2018. The patency, the freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate, clinical improvement, and safety endpoints were analyzed during a 14-month follow-up period. Results: Out of the 28 patients, 32.1% presented with critical limb ischemia. The mean lesion length was 250.4 ± 93.9 mm. Technical success was achieved in all lesions (100%). Debulking devices were used in 50% of lesions, and bailout stents were performed in 3.6% of patients. Kaplan Meier estimates that the 14-month primary patency was 79.2% (95% CI 60.6-97.8%), whereas the freedom from TLR rate was 91.5% (95% CI 80.1-100%). Clinical symptoms improved by at least 1 Rutherford category in 82.1% of limbs. The ankle-brachial index (ABI) values improved from 0.51 ± 0.30 to 1.05 ± 0.22 at the final follow-up (P < 0.001). The rate of freedom from 30-day major adverse limb events (MALEs) was 100%. The mortality rate was 7.1%. Conclusion: These results suggested that the use of DCBs is safe and effective in treating femoropopliteal Tosaka class III ISR lesions.

Long-term clinical effectiveness of a drug-coated balloon for in-stent restenosis in Femoropopliteal lesions

Background

The short-term efficacy of paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) has been established in femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions. The aim of this study was to compare 5-year clinical outcomes of patients with femoropopliteal ISR lesions undergoing percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with and without PCB.

Methods

After 1:1 propensity score matching, we extracted 50 patients with femoropopliteal ISR lesions undergoing PTA with (n = 25) and without (n = 25) IN.PACT PCB (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) from 106 consecutive ISR patients treated in our hospital between 2009 and 2015. We compared the 5-year outcomes between PCB and non-PCB groups. The primary endpoint was the cumulative 5-year incidence of recurrent restenosis. All-cause mortality, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and unplanned major amputation were also assessed.

Results

The primary patency after PCB treatment at 5 years was significantly higher than the patency after non-PCB treatment (65.7% vs. 18.7%; hazard ratio [HR]: 6.11; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 2.57–16.82; p < 0.001), as well as freedom from TLR (77.6% vs. 53.8%; HR: 3.55; 95% CI: 1.21–12.83; p = 0.020). All-cause mortality and unplanned major amputation rates did not significantly differ between the two groups. The Cox proportional hazard multivariate analysis showed that PCB was independently associated with preventing recurrent restenosis (HR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.06–0.41; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

At 5 years, patients with femoropopliteal ISR lesions undergoing PCB treatment showed significantly lower recurrent restenosis than those that underwent non-PCB treatment.

Evidence-based medicine

Level of Evidence: Level 2b, Non-randomized controlled cohort/follow-up study.

Long-Term Effectiveness of a Drug-Eluting Stent for Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis: Subanalysis of the Zilver PTX Japan Post-Market Surveillance Study

PURPOSE

To present a subgroup analysis of patients from a large real-world study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of the Zilver PTX drug-eluting stent (DES) for treating femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study examined patients enrolled in the Zilver PTX Japan Post-Market Surveillance Study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02254837), a prospective, multicenter registry of 904 symptomatic patients with 1082 femoropopliteal lesions treated with the DES at 95 institutions in Japan. Five-year outcomes, including mortality, stent radiography, freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR), and clinical benefit, were evaluated for 177 patients (mean age 74.2±8.3 years; 118 men) with 204 ISR lesions treated with the Zilver DES. Over half of the patients (108, 61.0%) were diabetic. Mean lesion length was 17.8±10.4 cm, and a third (72, 35.3%) were total occlusions. Outcome measures were all-cause mortality, thrombosis, freedom from TLR, and clinical benefit, defined as freedom from persistent or deteriorating ischemic symptoms.

RESULTS

No device-related or procedure-related deaths or paclitaxel-related adverse events were reported. All-cause mortality was 25.1% at 5 years. Stent fracture was observed in 5 stents through 5 years. The 5-year rate of freedom from clinically-driven TLR was 73.4%, and the rate of clinical benefit was 63.6%. Improvement in Rutherford category and ankle-brachial index was sustained through 5 years.

CONCLUSION

The safety and effectiveness of the Zilver PTX stent for the treatment of femoropopliteal ISR lesions demonstrated that this device provides a favorable treatment option in this difficult-to-treat subgroup.

Mortality in patients undergoing revascularization with paclitaxel eluting devices for infrainguinal peripheral artery disease: Insights from a network meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate whether paclitaxel eluting devices increased the risk of death in patients undergoing revascularization for infrainguinal peripheral artery disease using network meta-analyses.

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE were searched through April 2020 for randomized trials in patients with infrainguinal peripheral artery disease who underwent revascularization with or without a paclitaxel eluting device (balloon/stent). Short-term mortality defined as death at 6-12 months, and long-term mortality defined as death at >12 months after revascularization.

RESULTS

Our search identified 57 eligible randomized controlled studies enrolling a total of 9,362 patients comparing seven revascularization strategies (balloon angioplasty vs. bare metal stent vs. covered stent vs. paclitaxel eluting stent vs. other drug eluting stent vs. paclitaxel-coated balloon vs. bypass surgery). Overall, paclitaxel eluting stent and paclitaxel-coated balloons did not increase short-term mortality (eg, vs. balloon angioplasty: paclitaxel-coated balloon OR [95% CI] 1.21 [0.88-1.66], p = .24; paclitaxel eluting stent OR [95%CI] 1.01 [0.63-1.63], p = .97, respectively). In addition, paclitaxel eluting stent did not show significant increase in long-term mortality (eg, vs. balloon angioplasty: OR [95%CI] 1.06 [0.70-1.59], p = .79). However, paclitaxel-coated balloon showed significant increase in long-term mortality compared to balloon angioplasty and bypass (vs. balloon angioplasty: OR [95% CI] 1.48 [1.06-2.07], p = .021; vs. bypass: OR [95%CI] 1.73 [1.05-2.84], p = .031, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis of randomized trials, there was no significant increase in mortality with paclitaxel eluting stent, but there was increased risk of long-term mortality in paclitaxel-coated balloon for the treatment of infrainguinal peripheral artery disease.

Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty and Debulking for the Treatment of Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The purpose of this article was to compare the efficiency and safety of drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCB) and atherectomy with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) in patients with femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR). Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (all up to March 2019) were searched systematically. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted. 5 studies with 599 participants were included. Compared with PTA, DCB significantly increased the rate of patency (6 months: RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.09, P < 0.01; 12 months: RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.71 to 3.30, P < 0.01) and the rate freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) (6 months: RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.28, P < 0.01; 12 months: RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.82, P < 0.01) at 6 and 12 months follow-up, and the TSA results showed these outcomes were reliable. The rate of clinical improvement by ≥1 Rutherford category in the DCB group was higher than that in the PTA group (6 months: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.75, P = 0.03; 12 months: RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.82, P < 0.01) at 6 and 12 months. There is no statistically difference of ABI, all-cause mortality, and incidence of amputation between DCB group and PTA group (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.08, P = 0.40; RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.46 to 3.34, P = 0.67; RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.61, P = 0.48). Compared with PTA, the rate of patency and freedom from TLR in the laser atherectomy (LD) group was higher than that in the PTA group (patency: 6 months: RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.64, P < 0.05, 12 months: RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.44, P < 0.05; freedom from TLR: 6 months: RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.53, P = 0.01, 12 months: RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.25, P = 0.01) at 6 and 12 months follow-up. In conclusion, DCB and LD had superior clinical (freedom from TLR and clinical improvement) and angiographic outcomes (patency rate) compared with PTA for the treatment of femoropopliteal ISR. Moreover, DCB and LD had a low incidence of amputation and mortality and were relatively safe methods.

Safety and efficacy of paclitaxel drug-coated balloon in femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis

INTRODUCTION

The femoropopliteal (FP) segment is a common site of involvement in peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and endovascular therapy has been shown to be safe and effective in the treatment of FP disease. Self-expanding nitinol stents are now frequently used for the treatment of FP disease but in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a major issue that can lead to recurrence of symptoms requiring repeated revascularizations. Compared to plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have shown promising results with reduction of ISR rates and target lesion revascularization (TLR).

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this review is to describe the mechanisms and classification of ISR and to summarize the available data on outcomes of all DCBs, especially in the treatment of FP ISR.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently available data supports the use of DCBs as a first-line therapy in patients with FP ISR, with lower rates of TLR and higher patency rates at 1-year follow-up, when compared to POBA. Further randomized studies are essential to evaluate longer term safety and efficacy of DCBs.

Paclitaxel-Based Devices for the Treatment of PAD: Balancing Clinical Efficacy with Possible Risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Paclitaxel-based endovascular devices have become the standard of care in symptomatic, medication-refractory peripheral artery disease (PAD) and in critical limb ischemia (CLI). This review examines the data on the efficacy and safety of these devices relative to standard balloon angioplasty (PTA) and bare metal stents (BMS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have found that peripheral devices coated with paclitaxel result in superior patency rates and decreased target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared with non-drug-coated devices. Recently, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials unexpectedly reported an increase in mortality in patients treated with paclitaxel-coated devices (PCDs), resulting in the pausing of ongoing trials and a warning of safety from the FDA. Observational data that has been published since this time has not supported this safety concern. PAD is a common disease that severely impacts quality and length of life. PCDs are a promising therapy for patients with PAD, offering a more effective and durable intervention when compared with traditional PTA/BMS. A meta-analysis of RCTs identified a signal of harm with these devices which has now been replicated by the FDA. However, there is significant missing data from the trials analyzed by the meta-analysis and FDA, no plausible mechanism linking paclitaxel to death, and no correlation between paclitaxel dose and mortality. Analyses in observational data have found no safety signal. An FDA panel evaluating the validity of this late-mortality signal recently adjourned, emphasizing that the available data is incomplete. PCDs will remain on the market, and an active discussion is underway for developing an approach for improved post-market surveillance, device-labeling, and cause of death adjudication.

Drug-coated balloon versus plain old balloon angioplasty in femoropopliteal disease: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has emerged as a mainstay of therapy for the treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) involving the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. We performed a meta-analysis including all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to date which compare DCB to plain balloon angioplasty (POBA) in femoropopliteal disease (FPD).

METHODS

Five databases were analyzed including EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web-of-Science from January 2000 to September 2018 for RCTs comparing DCB to POBA in patients with FPD. Heterogeneity was determined using Cochrane's Q-statistics. Random effects model was used.

RESULTS

Twenty-two RCTs, including five trials of in-stent restenosis (ISR) intervention, with 3,217 patients were included in the analysis. Mean follow-up was approximately 21.6 ± 14.4 months. Overall, DCB use was associated with a 51% reduction in target vessel revascularization (TLR) when compared to POBA at follow-up (relative risk [RR]: 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.61, P < 0.0001). Rates of TLR were 45% lower in the DCB group when compared to POBA in patients with ISR (RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37-0.81, P = 0.002). DCB was associated with lower rates of binary stenosis, late lumen loss and higher primary safety endpoints. Major amputation and mortality were not different between DCB and POBA.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of DCBs is associated with improved vessel patency and a lower risk of TLR when compared to POBA in patients with FPD, especially in the setting of ISR. There was no difference in mortality between DCB and POBA in our meta-analysis. Extended follow-up of the available RCT data will be essential to analyze long-term device-related mortality.

Drug-eluting balloon angioplasty versus uncoated balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis of the femoropopliteal arteries

BACKGROUND

Stents are placed in the femoropopliteal arteries for numerous reasons, such as atherosclerotic disease, the need for dissection, and perforation of the arteries, and can become stenosed with the passage of time. When a stent develops a flow-limiting stenosis, this process is known as "in-stent stenosis." It is thought that in-stent restenosis is caused by a process known as "intimal hyperplasia" rather than by the progression of atherosclerotic disease. Management of in-stent restenosis may include performing balloon angioplasty, deploying another stent within the stenosed stent to force it open, and creating a bypass to deliver blood around the stent. The role of drug-eluting technologies, such as drug-eluting balloons (DEBs), in the management of in-stent restenosis is unclear. Drug-eluting balloons might function by coating the inside of stenosed stents with cytotoxic chemicals such as paclitaxel and by inhibiting the hyperplastic processes responsible for in-stent restenosis. It is important to perform this systematic review to evaluate the efficacy of DEB because of the potential for increased expenses associated with DEBs over uncoated balloon angioplasty, also known as plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of DEBs compared with uncoated balloon angioplasty in people with in-stent restenosis of the femoropopliteal arteries as assessed by criteria such as amputation-free survival, vessel patency, target lesion revascularization, binary restenosis rate, and death. We define "in-stent restenosis" as 50% or greater narrowing of a previously stented vessel by duplex ultrasound or angiography.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to November 28, 2017. Review authors also undertook reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials that compared DEBs versus uncoated balloon angioplasty for treatment of in-stent restenosis in the femoropopliteal arteries.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (AK, WA) independently selected appropriate trials and performed data extraction, assessment of trial quality, and data analysis. The senior review author (AD) adjudicated any disagreements.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials that randomized a combined total of 263 participants met the review inclusion criteria. All three trials examined the treatment of symptomatic in-stent restenosis within the femoropopliteal arteries. These trials were carried out in Germany and Austria and used paclitaxel as the agent in the drug-eluting balloons. Two of the three trials were industry sponsored. Two companies manufactured the drug-eluting balloons (Eurocor, Bonn, Germany; Medtronic, Fridley, Minnesota, USA). The trials examined both anatomical and clinical endpoints. We noted heterogeneity in the frequency of bailout stenting deployment between studies as well as in the dosage of paclitaxel applied by the DEBs. Using GRADE assessment criteria, we determined that the certainty of evidence presented was very low for the outcomes of amputation, target lesion revascularization, binary restenosis, death, and improvement of one or more Rutherford categories. Most participants were followed up to 12 months, but one trial followed participants for up to 24 months.Trial results show no difference in the incidence of amputation between DEBs and uncoated balloon angioplasty. DEBs showed better outcomes for up to 24 months for target lesion revascularization (odds ratio (OR) 0.05, 95% confidence Interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.92 at six months; OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.70 at 24 months) and at six and 12 months for binary restenosis (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.56 at six months; OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.76 at 12 months). Participants treated with DEBs also showed improvement of one or more Rutherford categories at six and 12 months (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.02 to 3.21 at six months; OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.83 at 12 months). Data show no clear differences in death between DEBs and uncoated balloon angioplasty. Data were insufficient for subgroup or sensitivity analyses to be conducted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on a meta-analysis of three trials with 263 participants, evidence suggests an advantage for DEBs compared with uncoated balloon angioplasty for anatomical endpoints such as target lesion revascularization (TLR) and binary restenosis, and for one clinical endpoint - improvement in Rutherford category post intervention for up to 24 months. However, the certainty of evidence for all these outcomes is very low due to the small number of included studies and participants and the high risk of bias in study design. Adequately powered and carefully constructed randomized controlled trials are needed to adequately investigate the role of drug-eluting technologies in the management of in-stent restenosis.

Risk of Death Following Application of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons and Stents in the Femoropopliteal Artery of the Leg: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background Several randomized controlled trials ( RCT s) have already shown that paclitaxel-coated balloons and stents significantly reduce the rates of vessel restenosis and target lesion revascularization after lower extremity interventions. Methods and Results A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT s investigating paclitaxel-coated devices in the femoral and/or popliteal arteries was performed. The primary safety measure was all-cause patient death. Risk ratios and risk differences were pooled with a random effects model. In all, 28 RCT s with 4663 patients (89% intermittent claudication) were analyzed. All-cause patient death at 1 year (28 RCT s with 4432 cases) was similar between paclitaxel-coated devices and control arms (2.3% versus 2.3% crude risk of death; risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.72-1.61). All-cause death at 2 years (12 RCT s with 2316 cases) was significantly increased in the case of paclitaxel versus control (7.2% versus 3.8% crude risk of death; risk ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.15-2.47; -number-needed-to-harm, 29 patients [95% CI , 19-59]). All-cause death up to 5 years (3 RCT s with 863 cases) increased further in the case of paclitaxel (14.7% versus 8.1% crude risk of death; risk ratio, 1.93; 95% CI , 1.27-2.93; -number-needed-to-harm, 14 patients [95% CI , 9-32]). Meta-regression showed a significant relationship between exposure to paclitaxel (dose-time product) and absolute risk of death (0.4±0.1% excess risk of death per paclitaxel mg-year; P<0.001). Trial sequential analysis excluded false-positive findings with 99% certainty (2-sided α, 1.0%). Conclusions There is increased risk of death following application of paclitaxel-coated balloons and stents in the femoropopliteal artery of the lower limbs. Further investigations are urgently warranted. Clinical Trial Registration URL : www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO . Unique identifier: CRD 42018099447.

Drug-coated balloon in superficial femoral artery in-stent restenosis

The femoropopliteal artery is one of the commonest sites of involvement in peripheral artery disease (PAD) leading to intermittent claudication and/or critical limb ischemia. Endovascular therapy for superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease has been recognized as a safe and efficient therapy and is recommended by current guidelines as the first-line approach. Although the widespread use of new-generation, self-expanding, nitinol stents in SFA stenosis has reduced the shortcomings associated with plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), lumen renarrowing at the stented (in-stent restenosis - ISR) level still represents a relevant clinical problem, because of higher risk of recurrent ISR, occlusion and surgical revascularization compared to de-novo lesions. In this setting, different treatment options are available and drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have shown good results in terms of safety and effectiveness. In this review we examine the results of different trials exploring the outcome of using DCBs for the treatment of SFA ISR. The available data demonstrate that SFA ISR can be safely treated with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with a DCB, with a reduction in recurrent restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at least at 1 year after POBA. The consistent and positive results of different registries and randomized trials support the use of DCB to reduce SFA ISR recurrence.