A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of the efficacy and safety of endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation.

OBJECTIVE: The percutaneous endovascular approach to arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation is a minimally invasive alternative to surgical AVF creation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of endovascular AVF creation in patients with end-stage renal disease. METHODS: This study conformed to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. An electronic search was performed on major databases to identify relevant articles. Meta-analysis of proportions and meta-regression were conducted. RESULTS: Seven studies totaling 300 patients were included, of which four evaluated the everlinQ (TVA Medical, Austin, Tex) and three employed the Ellipsys (Avenu Medical, San Juan Capistrano, Calif) systems. The overall technical success rate was 97.50% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.98-99.31%; I2 = 0.00%; P = .487). The 90-day maturation rate was 89.27% (95% CI, 84.00-93.66%; I2 = 21.29%; P = .283), and the 6-month patency and 12-month patency were 91.99% (95% CI, 87.98-95.35%; I2 = 0.00%; P = .780) and 85.71% (95% CI, 79.90-90.71%; I2 = 0.00%; P = NS), respectively. The overall procedure-related complication rate was 5.46% (95% CI, 0.310-14.42%; I2 = 81.21%; P = .000). Meta-regression was conducted on the pooled rates of technical success and complication, showing that age, diabetes, white race, hypertension, on dialysis, and body mass index were not significant sources of heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Current endovascular AVF systems appear to be effective and safe. However, given the lack of head-to-head comparative analyses with surgical AVF creation, superiority cannot be established.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of drug-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty for dialysis access stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Arteriovenous fistulas for patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) are at high risk of stenosis. Despite conventional balloon angioplasty (CBA), restenosis rates are high. The use of a drug-coated balloon (DCB) may offer an alternative to reduce restenosis. METHODS: This study has been performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. An electronic search on MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify articles evaluating DCB angioplasty for patients with HD access stenosis. Risk ratios (RRs) of primary patency were pooled, and relevant subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: There were 17 studies (8 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 9 cohort studies) included, comprising a total of 1113 stenotic dialysis accesses, of which 54.7% underwent DCB angioplasty and 45.3% underwent CBA. There was a significantly superior 6-month (RR, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.74; P < .00001; I2 = 62%) and 12-month (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.63-0.84; P < .0001; I2 = 53%) primary patency in the DCB angioplasty group in comparison to the CBA group (71.0% vs 49.2% at 6 months; 44.2% vs 20.6% at 12 months). Subgroup analyses of study design (RCTs, cohort studies) showed similar trends. Sensitivity analyses by excluding one poor-quality RCT and those employing the crossover analysis design also showed similar results. Studies investigating central venous stenosis showed significantly better 6-month (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.79; P = .0009; I2 = 67%) and 12-month (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.85; P = .0004; I2 = 64%) primary patency in the DCB angioplasty group in comparison to the CBA group. The pooled rate of minor complications was low in both the DCB (1.1%) and CBA (0.9%) groups. CONCLUSIONS: DCB angioplasty appears to be a better and safe alternative to CBA in treating patients with HD stenosis in terms of 6- and 12-month primary patency. However, a larger trial is warranted to establish these findings.