Percutaneous Angioplasty Using a Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Improves Target Lesion Restenosis on Inflow Lesions of Autogenous Radiocephalic Fistulas: A Pilot Study

Comparison of Outcomes of Drug-Coated Balloons versus Plain Balloons in Secondary Interventions on Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistulae

PURPOSE

To compare patency and reintervention outcomes after either plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) or drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCBA) for venous stenoses after percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) creation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-hundred ninety-five pAVFs were successfully created during the study period, 141 using Ellipsys and 54 using Wavelinq. After pAVF creation, 95 patients (48.7%) required secondary percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with either POBA (n = 55, 58%) or DCBA (n = 40, 42.1%). The most common site for PTA was the juxta-anastomotic segment (75.5%; 74/98). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to compare target lesion primary patency, access circuit primary patency, secondary patency, and reintervention rates in the POBA and DCBA cohorts.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of 55 (62%) patients in the POBA cohort and 14 of 40 (35%) patients in the DCBA cohort required reinterventions for pAVF restenosis. Mean number of follow-up days among patients treated with POBA was 1,030.4 (SD ± 342.9) and among those treated with DCBA was 744.4 (SD ± 403.5). The use of POBA compared with DCBA was not associated with target lesion and access circuit primary patency loss in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81; 95% CI, 0.93-3.51; P = .080; and HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.73-4.28; P = .210, respectively). However, time from fistula creation to the first PTA (days) was statistically significantly associated with both outcomes (HR, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.994-0.999; P = .009; and HR, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.992-0.999; P = .021, respectively). There were no major adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective single-center analysis of pAVFs, considerably more patients who underwent PTA with POBA after pAVF creation required reinterventions compared with PTA using DCBA, although the follow-up time of POBA was longer. In multivariate analysis, no differences were noted in the hazard of patency loss between POBA and DCBA.

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.

A review of the current recommendations and practices for hemodialysis access monitoring and maintenance procedures

The growing number of prevalent arteriovenous (AV) accesses has been associated with an increase in the incidence of procedures being performed to maintain patency. To reduce the rate of unnecessary procedures, the 2019 Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative guidelines addended the AV access surveillance recommendations, which includes clinical monitoring and assessment of dialysis adequacy alone. Abnormal clinical findings would necessitate follow-up angiography with or without confirmatory duplex ultrasound. Due to poor patency, increased surveillance schedules have been proposed to identify stenosis early and potentially prevent acute thrombotic events and AV access failure. In this review, we outlined current AV access monitoring and maintenance procedure recommendations, as described by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and 2019 Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative guidelines. In addition, we highlight the findings of recently published randomized controlled trials that have examined increased surveillance schedules.

Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for Dysfunctional Arteriovenous Hemodialysis Fistulae: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-coated balloons (AcoArt Orchid) in treating dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulae.

METHODS

The drug-eluting balloon for arteriovenous (AV) fistula in China trial was a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled study. Patients who had ≥50% venous stenosis of the AV fistula and symptoms indicating significant hemodynamic changes were included. After successful predilation with a high-pressure balloon (residual stenosis ≤30%), patients were randomized 1:1 to either a paclitaxel-coated balloon or an uncoated control balloon. The primary efficacy outcome was assessed at 6 months, and safety assessment was conducted within 30 days of the procedure. The 12-month results were also analyzed.

RESULTS

The study included 244 patients, equally distributed between the two groups. The primary target lesion patency was 91% (106/116) for the drug-coated balloon (DCB) group and 67% (79/118) for the plain balloon catheter group, representing a difference of 24.63% (95% confidence interval, 14.68 to 34.58; P < 0.001). The secondary efficacy end point was primary target lesion patency at 12 months, which was 66% (74/112) for the DCB group and 46% (52/112) for the plain balloon catheter group (95% confidence interval, 6.57 to 32.08; P = 0.004). The mean number of reinterventions per patient to maintain target lesion patency during the 12 months after the index procedure was 0.39 (48/122) in the DCB group and 0.77 (94/122) in the plain balloon catheter group ( P = 0.001). The primary safety end point did not differ between groups ( P = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

AcoArt Orchid DCB showed better primary patency rates compared with plain balloon angioplasty for treating stenotic lesions in dysfunctional hemodialysis AV fistulae at 6 and 12 months. It required fewer repeated interventions and had comparable safety in 1 year.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

AcoArt III/Arterio-venous Fistula in China, NCT03366727 .

A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial for Comparing Drug-Coated and Conventional Balloon Angioplasty in Venous Anastomotic Stenosis of Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Grafts

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloon angioplasty compared to conventional balloon angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous grafts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial enrolled 190 patients with venous anastomotic stenosis in arteriovenous grafts at five participating hospitals. During pre-dilation, 4 patients dropped out due to ruptures requiring further treatment (n = 2) and residual stenosis of > 30% (n = 2). On successful pre-dilation with a 7 mm conventional balloon, patients were randomized to undergo either a 7 mm drug-coated balloon (n = 94) or conventional balloon angioplasty (n = 92). The primary out-come measure was target lesion primary patency at 3 and 6 months. The secondary out-come measures included target lesion primary patency at 12 months and access circuit primary patency at 6 and 12 months, clinical and technical success rates, and 12-month mortality differences between the groups.

RESULTS

The target lesion primary patency and access circuit patency rates at 3 and 6 months were significantly higher in drug-coated balloon angioplasty group as compared to conventional balloon angioplasty group. The technical and clinical success rates were 100% for both the groups. As a procedure-related complication, anastomotic site rupture occurred during pre-dilation in 4 cases. The number of deaths during the 12-month follow-up was one for each group. The number of early thrombotic events (at < 3 months) was significantly higher in the drug-coated balloon group (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty was more effective and safer for the treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous grafts compared to conventional balloon angioplasty.

Angioplasty for dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulas: A meta-analysis of recent randomized controlled trials compared paclitaxel-coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty

BACKGROUND

Stenosis in arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) due to neointimal hyperplasia is one of the most common causes of hemodialysis vascular access dysfunction. Treating patients with dysfunctional AVF with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty may potentially improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of DCB angioplasty versus conventional balloon angioplasty by pooling evidence from the most recent randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane central databases. Two independent researchers screened the article, extracted interest, and evaluated included studies for risk of bias. Pooled estimation was conducted in terms of 6-month target-lesion primary patency (TLPP) and target-lesion reintervention (TLR), as well as other outcomes.

RESULTS

Results were expressed with odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of five RCTs were identified and included in the meta-analyses, with 1107 participants. DCB has a trend of a higher rate of TLPP (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.66-4.90, p = 0.181) and a significantly lower rate of TLR (0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.92, p = 0.034), as compared to conventional balloon angioplasty. No difference in the 6-month access circuit primary patency and reinvention was observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

DCB may be an alternative treatment of dysfunctional AVF given a trend of a higher rate of TLPP and a significantly lower rate of TLR than conventional balloon angioplasty within 6 months after the indexed procedure. Moreover, DCB was non-inferior to conventional balloon angioplasty in terms of safety. Considering variations in the DCB technique, further studies are warranted for a standardized process.

Contemporary review of management techniques for cephalic arch stenosis in hemodialysis

The type of hemodialysis access and its preservation impact the quality of life and survival of patients undergoing hemodialysis. Vascular access complications are among the top causes of morbidity, hospitalization, and catheter use, with significant economic burden. Poor maturation and stenosis continue to be key impediments to upper arm arteriovenous fistula feasibility. Cephalic arch is a common location for vascular access dysfunction due to its distinctive anatomy, complex valves, and biochemical alterations attributable to renal failure. Understanding cephalic arch stenosis is critical due to its high prevalence and treatment failure. The appropriate management option is highly debatable and mostly dependent on patient characteristics and interventionist's preference. Current options include, percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty, stent grafts, bare metal stents, cutting balloon angioplasty, endovascular banding, and surgical procedures. This article discusses the etiologies of cephalic arch stenosis as well as currents trends in management including endovascular and surgical options.

Central vein stenosis in hemodialysis vascular access: clinical manifestations and contemporary management strategies

Central venous stenosis is a significant and frequently encountered problem in managing hemodialysis (HD) patients. Venous hypertension, often accompanied by severe symptoms, undermines the integrity of the hemodialysis access circuit. In central venous stenosis, dialysis through an arteriovenous fistula is usually inefficient, with high recirculation rates and prolonged bleeding after dialysis. Central vein stenosis is a known complication of indwelling intravascular and cardiac devices, such as peripherally inserted central catheters, long-term cuffed hemodialysis catheters, and pacemaker wires. Hence, preventing this challenging condition requires minimization of central venous catheter use. Endovascular interventions are the primary approach for treating central vein stenosis. Percutaneous angioplasty and stent placement may reestablish vascular function in cases of elastic and recurrent lesions. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal treatment, as existing management approaches have a wide range of patency rates.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Dialysis Fistula Malfunction

The creation and maintenance of a dialysis access is vital for the reduction of morbidity, mortality, and cost of treatment for end stage renal disease patients. One's longevity on dialysis is directly dependent upon the quality of dialysis. This quality hinges on the integrity and reliability of the access to the patient's vascular system. All methods of dialysis access will eventually result in dialysis dysfunction and failure. Arteriovenous access dysfunction includes 3 distinct classes of events, namely thrombotic flow-related complications or dysfunction, nonthrombotic flow-related complications or dysfunction, and infectious complications. The restoration of any form of arteriovenous access dysfunction may be supported by diagnostic imaging, clinical consultation, percutaneous interventional procedures, surgical management, or a combination of these methods. This document provides a rigorous evaluation of how variants of each form of dysfunction may be appraised and approached systematically. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Maintenance and Salvage of Hemodialysis Access

Many end-stage kidney failure patients require hemodialysis as a life-sustaining treatment. Hemodialysis access via arteriovenous fistula or graft creation is preferred over long-term dialysis catheters, but intervention to maintain patency and prevent access failure is common. Endovascular and open surgical techniques are both utilized to address the underlying etiology of failure. Endovascular options include balloon angioplasty, angioplasty with stenting, and drug-eluting stents. Open revision is commonly needed for recurrent stenosis, aneurysmal or pseudoaneurysmal change, hemodialysis access-induced distal ischemia, and infection. Treatment plans should be guided by patient's individualized goals of care and require a multidisciplinary approach to the management of this complex disease.

Comparison of drug-coated balloon angioplasty versus common balloon angioplasty for arteriovenous fistula stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have been used in dialysis patients with arteriovenous fistula (AVF) stenosis, but whether DCBs have advantages over ordinary balloons is still controversial. A meta-analysis was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of DCBs and common balloons (CBs) in the treatment of AVF stenosis. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI) databases for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the comparison of DCB angioplasty versus CB angioplasty for AVF stenosis in dialysis patients and reported at least one outcome of interest. The results showed that the DCB group had a higher first-stage patency rate of the target lesion 6 months [odds ratio, OR = 2.31, 95% confidence interval, CI: (1.69, 3.15), p < .01] and 12 months [OR = 2.09, 95% CI: (1.50, 2.91), p < .01] after surgery. There was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the two groups at 6 months [OR = 0.85, 95% CI: (0.47, 1.52), p = .58] and 12 months [OR = 0.99, 95% CI: (0.60, 1.64), p = .97]. Compared with CB, DCBs as a new endovascular treatment for AVF stenosis have a higher primary patency rate of target lesions and can delay the occurrence of restenosis. There is no evidence that DCB can increase the mortality of patients.

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.

Paclitaxel coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty in dysfunctional dialysis arteriovenous fistula: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

To compare the efficacy and safety between paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty and conventional balloon (CB) angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous fistula (AVF).

Methods

We searched four major electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from inception through November 28, 2021. Outcomes of interest included target lesion primary patency (TLPP), technical success and all-cause mortality. The STATA package version 15.1 was utilized to undertake meta-analyses.

Results

Fourteen RCTs totaling 1535 patients were analyzed. The available data showed that there were no significant differences of TLPP rates at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months between the PCB group and the CB group (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93–1.07, p = 1.000, I² = 33.5%, Cochrane Q test p = 0.185, fixed-effect model; RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.99–1.39, p = 0.065, I² = 75.4%, Cochrane Q test p = 0.000, random-effect model; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.35–1.89, p = 0.625, I² = 62.8%, Cochrane Q test p = 0.045, random-effect model; RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.97–1.47, p = 0.096, I² = 40.5%, Cochrane Q test p = 0.071, random-effect model). In addition, two groups had similar technical success rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97–1.03, p = 1.000, I² = 0.0%, Cochrane Q test p = 0.596, fixed-effect model) and all-cause mortality rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.54–1.84, p = 1.000, I² = 0.0%, Cochrane Q test p = 0.599, fixed-effect model).

Conclusions

PCB angioplasty did not appear to convey any obvious advantage over CB angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional AVF. However, further multi-center, large-scale and well-designed RCTs are needed to prove outcomes.

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty for Hemodialysis Dysfunction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background Both drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and conventional plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) can be implemented to treat hemodialysis dysfunction. The present study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of these 2 approaches by conducting a meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials. Methods and Results PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were queried from establishment to January 2021. A total of 18 randomized controlled trials including 877 and 875 patients in the DCB and PBA groups, respectively, were included in the present meta-analysis. Target lesion primary patency, circuit patency, target lesion revascularization, and mortality were pooled. Odds ratios (ORs) were reported with 95% CIs. Publication bias was analyzed with funnel plot and Egger test. Target lesion primary patency was higher among patients who underwent DCB (OR, 2.93 [95% CI, 2.13-4.03], P<0.001 at 6 months; OR, 2.47 [95% CI, 1.53-3.99], P<0.001 at 1 year). Also, the DCB group had a higher dialysis circuit patency at 6 months (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.56-3.77 [P<0.001]) and 1 year (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.22-3.00 [P=0.005]). Compared with the PBA group, the DCB group had lower odds of target lesion revascularization during follow-up (OR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.23-0.82], P=0.001 at 6 months; OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.32-1.73], P=0.490 at 1 year). The OR of mortality was comparable between 2 groups at 6 months (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.42-3.33 [P=0.760]) and 1 year (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.58-1.48 [P=0.750]). Conclusions Based on evidence from 18 randomized controlled trials, DCB angioplasty is superior to PBA in maintaining target lesion primary patency and circuit patency among patients with dialysis circuit stenosis. DCB angioplasty also reduces target lesion revascularization with a similar risk of mortality compared with PBA.

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty for failing haemodialysis access: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Arteriovenous fistulas, a major treatment for end-stage kidney disease, frequently require endovascular reinterventions to maintain haemodialysis function. Drug-coated angioplasty balloons (DCBs) were developed with the intention of reducing reintervention rates. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of DCBs in the treatment of failing haemodialysis access.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched systematically to identify all relevant RCTs and any follow-up studies from RCTs. Pooled estimates of dichotomous outcomes were calculated using the odds ratio (OR) and 95 per cent confidence interval. Effect data are presented as summary hazard ratio and 95 per cent confidence interval.

RESULTS

Some 19 studies from 18 RCTs and comprising 1898 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with plain balloon angioplasty (PBA), DCB use was associated with higher target-lesion primary patency (HR 0.60, 95 per cent c.i. 0.45 to 0.79), access-circuit primary patency (HR 0.67, 0.56 to 0.80), and less target-lesion revascularization (TLR) within 6 months (OR 0.33, 0.23 to 0.47). No difference was observed between DCB and PBA in 12-month TLR (OR 0.62, 0.28 to 1.37). Mortality after DCB use was similar to that associated with PBA use at 6 months (OR 1.20, 0.65 to 2.21) and 12 months (OR 0.99, 0.66 to 1.49), and was higher at 24 months (23.1 versus 16.6 per cent), although the difference was not statistically significant (OR 1.53, 0.92 to 2.53).

CONCLUSION

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty of haemodialysis fistulas is associated with higher patency rates and lower rates of reintervention in the short to mid term. Although mortality rates appeared to be higher with drug-coated angioplasty at 24 months, this did not reach statistical significance.

A multicenter randomized controlled trial indicates that paclitaxel-coated balloons provide no benefit for arteriovenous fistulas

The role of paclitaxel-coated balloons has been established in the coronary and peripheral arterial circulations with recent interest in the use of paclitaxel-coated balloons to improve patency rates following angioplasty of arteriovenous fistulas. To assess the efficacy of paclitaxel-coated angioplasty balloons to prolong the survival time of target lesion primary patency in arteriovenous fistulas, we designed an investigator-led multi-center randomized controlled trial with follow up time variable for a minimum of one year. Patients with an arteriovenous fistula who were undergoing an angioplasty for a clinical indication were included but patients with one or more lesions outside the treatment segment were excluded. Following successful treatment with a high-pressure balloon, 212 patients were randomized. In the intervention arm, the second component was insertion of a paclitaxel-coated balloon. In the control arm, an identical procedure was followed, but using a standard balloon. The primary endpoint was time to loss of clinically driven target lesion primary patency. Primary analysis showed no significant evidence for a difference in time to end of target lesion primary patency between groups: hazard ratio 1.18 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.78 to 1.79. There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes, including patency outcomes and adverse events. Thus, our study demonstrated no evidence that paclitaxel-coated balloons provide benefit, following standard care high-pressure balloon angioplasty, in the treatment of arteriovenous fistulas. Hence, in view of the benefit suggested by other trials, the role of paclitaxel-coated angioplasty balloons remains uncertain.

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.

Randomized Controlled Trial for Paclitaxel-coated Balloon versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty in Dysfunctional Hemodialysis Vascular Access: 12-month Outcome from a Nonsponsored Trial

BACKGROUND

Plain balloon angioplasty is regarded as the mainstay of treatment for failing vascular access with high success rate, but the poor treatment durability creates significant workload and increases patient morbidity. The study aims to compare target lesion primary patency rate at 12 months between paclitaxel-coated balloon (DCB) versus plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) for treatment of dysfunctional vascular access.

METHODS

This nonsponsored-randomized trial enrolled 40 patients with dysfunctional dialysis access at a single center. Patients were randomized into In.Pact Admiral Paclitaxel DCB or POBA after lesion crossing regardless of lesion type. Patients are followed up under surveillance protocol. Patients, hemodialysis staff, and sonographer are blinded to the treatment arms. Twelve-month primary patency rate in both arms are evaluated.

RESULTS

40 patients were recruited since June 2016 and were allocated to the DCB or POBA group. The mean age is 58 and 57 years with comparable demographic parameters. The locations of target lesion were comparable in both groups (juxta and arteriovenous anastomosis, cannulation site, and fistula/graft), with similar mean target lesion stenosis 69.8 +/- 15.8% for DCB and 69.5 +/- 13.6% for POBA (P = 0.95), and the lesion length for DCB is 45.8 +/- 38.4 mm and 50.2 +/- 33.5 mm for POBA (P = 0.70). Patients in DCB performed significantly better in terms of primary patency at 6 months 85% versus 55% (P = 0.007). The superiority in primary patency in DCB group exists at 12 months 65% versus 30% (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Paclitaxel balloon angioplasty approach provides significant better primary patency in dysfunctional arteriovenous access at 12 months in our nonsponsored-randomized trial.

Drug-Coated Balloons for Dysfunctional Dialysis Arteriovenous Fistulas

BACKGROUND

Standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty is the current recommended treatment for dysfunctional hemodialysis fistulas, yet long-term outcomes of this treatment are poor. Drug-coated balloons delivering the antirestenotic agent paclitaxel may improve outcomes.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-blinded, 1:1 randomized trial, we enrolled 330 participants at 29 international sites. Patients with new or restenotic lesions in native upper-extremity arteriovenous fistulas were eligible for participation. After successful high-pressure percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, participants were randomly assigned to receive treatment with a drug-coated balloon or a standard balloon. The primary effectiveness end point was target-lesion primary patency, defined as freedom from clinically driven target-lesion revascularization or access-circuit thrombosis during the 6 months after the index procedure. The primary safety end point, serious adverse events involving the arteriovenous access circuit within 30 days, was assessed in a noninferiority analysis (margin of noninferiority, 7.5 percentage points). The primary analyses included all participants with available end-point data. Additional sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the effect of missing data.

RESULTS

A total of 330 participants underwent randomization; 170 were assigned to receive treatment with a drug-coated balloon, and 160 were assigned to receive treatment with a standard balloon. During the 6 months after the index procedure, target-lesion primary patency was maintained more often in participants who had been treated with a drug-coated balloon than in those who had been treated with a standard balloon (82.2% [125 of 152] vs. 59.5% [88 of 148]; difference in risk, 22.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.8 to 32.8; P<0.001). Drug-coated balloons were noninferior to standard balloons with respect to the primary safety end point (4.2% [7 of 166] and 4.4% [7 of 158], respectively; difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -5.5 to 5.0; P = 0.002 for noninferiority). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results of the primary analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty was superior to standard angioplasty for the treatment of stenotic lesions in dysfunctional hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulas during the 6 months after the procedure and was noninferior with respect to access circuit-related serious adverse events within 30 days. (Funded by Medtronic; IN.PACT AV Access Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03041467.).

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.

Paclitaxel coated-balloon (PCB) versus standard plain old balloon (POB) fistuloplasty for failing dialysis access

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of paclitaxel-coated balloon compared with conventional plain balloon for the treatment of failing native dialysis access.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 60 patients presenting to the Kasr Alainy Hospitals and Aseer Central Hospital in the period from September 2015 to December 2017 with failing native vascular access. Dilatation with a plain balloon was done in 30 patients (group I) and with a paclitaxel-coated balloon in 30 patients (group II) with either stenosis or occlusion. The majority were outflow lesions, with 20 (66.7 %) patients in group I and 21 (70%) patients in group II. Mean balloon diameter was 7.1mm (± 1.5mm) compared with 6.5mm (± 1.2mm) and length 66mm (± 19.1mm) compared with 54.6mm (± 15.7mm), respectively. Safety endpoint was reported as 30 day's freedom from procedure-related major complications and mortality. Procedural technical success was defined as a residual diameter 30% or less for treated lesions. Target lesion primary patency, circuit primary patency and secondary patency were reported at 3, 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

There were no 30-day procedure-related major complications or mortality in either group. Procedural technical success of 100% was achieved in both groups. Target lesion primary patency, circuit primary patency and secondary patency in group II were better than in group I, especially at 12 months (90% vs 66.7%, 83.3% vs 60% and 96.7% vs 93.3%, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in target lesion primary patency (p = 0.029) in patients who were treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasties.

CONCLUSION

The paclitaxel-coated balloon proved to be safe and effective, and improved the patency of failing vascular access. Results are comparable with previous studies.

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)

Paclitaxel drug-coated balloon angioplasty for the treatment of failing arteriovenous fistulas: a single-center experience

Objectives: To report our experience of angioplasty with Lutonix (Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc., Tempe, AZ) drug-coated balloon (DCB) for the treatment of failing arteriovenous fistulas (AVF).Materials and methods: Retrospective, single-center analysis consisting of 14 patients treated with Lutonix paclitaxel DCBs in the period from July 2015 through April 2017. We analyzed technical success, clinical success, primary patency of the target lesion, primary patency of the dialysis circuit, and the rate of complications. Regular follow-up of AVF patency was realized by clinical examination and duplex ultrasonography. The Kaplan-Meier survival method was applied to determine the cumulative primary patency of the target lesion and the dialysis circuit.Results: Technical success was 100% and clinical success 92.9%. There were no major or minor complications. Cumulative target lesion primary patency after DCB was 69.2% at 6 months and 31.6% at 12 months. Cumulative vascular circuit primary patency was 61.5% at 6 months and 31.6% at 12 months.Conclusion: Compared to results reported in literature with plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), Lutonix paclitaxel DCB angioplasty proved a short-term patency benefit in treatment of dialysis AVF stenosis.

KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update

The National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) has provided evidence-based guidelines for hemodialysis vascular access since 1996. Since the last update in 2006, there has been a great accumulation of new evidence and sophistication in the guidelines process. The 2019 update to the KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access is a comprehensive document intended to assist multidisciplinary practitioners care for chronic kidney disease patients and their vascular access. New topics include the end-stage kidney disease "Life-Plan" and related concepts, guidance on vascular access choice, new targets for arteriovenous access (fistulas and grafts) and central venous catheters, management of specific complications, and renewed approaches to some older topics. Appraisal of the quality of the evidence was independently conducted by using a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and interpretation and application followed the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks. As applicable, each guideline statement is accompanied by rationale/background information, a detailed justification, monitoring and evaluation guidance, implementation considerations, special discussions, and recommendations for future research.

Use of Paclitaxel Coated Drug Eluting Technology to Improve Central Vein Patency for Haemodialysis Access Circuits: Any Benefit?

Purpose

Central venous stenosis is a recurring problem affecting dialysis access patency. Increasing evidence suggests that the use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) improves target lesion primary patency (TLPP) in dialysis access. However, few studies have investigated the use of DCBs specifically in central venous stenosis. Thus, this study presents our initial experience with DCBs in the central vein of a dialysis access circuit.

Materials and Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of all hemodialysis patients who underwent central vein angioplasty with DCB between February 2017 and March 2018 at Singapore General Hospital. We compared the primary patency post DCB angioplasty to the primary patency of the patient’s previous plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA).

Results

We observed a 100% anatomic and procedural success rate with no complications. The median follow-up period was 151 days (interquartile range, 85.5-234 days) and no patients were lost to follow-up. The 30- and 90-day TLPPs after DCB were 93.3% and 75.7%, respectively. The mean primary patency in our study group post-DCB during the follow-up period was 164 days (vs. 140 days in the POBA group). However, no statistically significant difference was detected.

Conclusion

DCB showed a similar TLPP to that for POBA in treating central venous stenosis with a trend toward a longer re-intervention-free period for DCB. However, there were numerous confounding factors and a well-designed randomized controlled trial is warranted to assess the true utility of DCB in treating central venous stenosis.

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.

Molecular Targets for Improving Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation and Patency

The increasing prevalence of chronic and end-stage renal disease creates an increased need for reliable vascular access, and although arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) are the preferred mode of hemodialysis access, 60% fail to mature and only 50% remain patent at one year. Fistulae mature by diameter expansion and wall thickening; this outward remodeling of the venous wall in the fistula environment relies on a delicate balance of extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling, inflammation, growth factor secretion, and cell adhesion molecule upregulation in the venous wall. AVF failure occurs via two distinct mechanisms with early failure secondary to lack of outward remodeling, that is insufficient diameter expansion or wall thickening, whereas late failure occurs with excessive wall thickening due to neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) and insufficient diameter expansion in a previously functional fistula. In recent years, the molecular basis of AVF maturation and failure are becoming understood in order to develop potential therapeutic targets to aide maturation and prevent access loss. Erythropoietin-producing hepatocellular carcinoma (Eph) receptors, along with their ligands, ephrins, determine vascular identity and are critical for vascular remodeling in the embryo. Manipulation of Eph receptor signaling in adults, as well as downstream pathways, is a potential treatment strategy to improve the rates of AVF maturation and patency. This review examines our current understanding of molecular changes occurring following fistula creation, factors predictive of fistula success, and potential areas of intervention to decrease AVF failure.

Mortality After Paclitaxel-Coated Device Use in Dialysis Access: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To report the risk of all-cause mortality in patients who underwent dialysis access treatment using paclitaxel-coated devices compared with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with an uncoated balloon. Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials were performed to investigate the mortality outcomes associated with paclitaxel-coated devices in the treatment of patients with a failing dialysis access (last search date February 28, 2019). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. This analysis included 8 studies comparing paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty (n=327) and PTA (n=331) in the treatment of failing dialysis access. None investigated paclitaxel-coated stents. Mortality data were pooled using a random effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated with a chi-square test and the I2 statistic. Summary statistics are expressed as relative risk ratios (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: At the pooled mean follow-up of 13.5 months (median 12, range 6–24) all-cause mortality was similar in the PCB group (13.8%) compared with PTA (11.2%; RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.89, p=0.25; I2=0%). Subgroup analysis, stratified according to length of follow-up, confirmed that there were no statistically significant differences in mortality at short- and midterm follow-up [6-month (8 studies): 5.2% vs 4.8%, RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.47, p=0.55; 12-month (6 studies): 6.3% vs 6.0%, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.63, p=0.90; and 24-month (3 studies): 19.0% vs 13.5%, RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.12, p=0.14). Conclusion: The analysis found no difference in short- to midterm mortality among patients treated with a drug-coated balloon compared with PTA. With proven benefit and no evidence of harm, the authors recommend ongoing use of PCB for the failing dialysis access.

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty in failing haemodialysis arteriovenous shunts: 12-month outcomes in 200 patients from the Aperto Italian registry

Background:

We evaluated the safety and technical and clinical outcomes of angioplasty with a drug-coated balloon for the management of venous stenosis in arteriovenous grafts and arteriovenous fistulas in patients undergoing haemodialysis.

Methods:

Data were obtained from an ongoing prospective, non-randomised registry conducted at three Italian centres. Patients were treated with a drug-coated balloon according to standard procedures in each participating centre. Evaluation was by colour Doppler imaging every 3 months. The primary end-point was primary assisted patency. The secondary end-point was the rate of assisted patency of the vascular access.

Results:

A total of 311 angioplasty procedures in 200 patients, (60.4% male), were analysed. The procedural success rate was 100%. A total of 192 treatments of restenosis were necessary in 81 patients during average 21 ± 8 months follow-up. Kaplan–Meier estimates indicated that 88.0%, 64.2% and 40.6% of treated lesions were free from restenosis at 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively. Including multiple angioplasty, circuit patency rates were 99.2%, 92.5% and 84.8% at 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively. Primary patency rates were highest in shunts treated de novo with drug-coated balloons. Risk of restenosis was associated with circuit age (p = 0.017), history of treatment with conventional angioplasty (p < 0.001) and the kind of balloon used during pre-dilation (p = 0.001).

Conclusion:

The results suggest that favourable long-term patency rates can be achieved with the drug-coated balloon in a varied population of patients with failing haemodialysis arteriovenous shunts treated under conditions of actual care.

Recent developments in endovascular interventions to sustain vascular access patency in haemodialysis patients

There is amassed evidence regarding the use of endovascular procedures for the treatment of vascular access stenosis and thrombosis. A review was conducted based on available randomized trials, cohort studies and retrospective analyses published after 2000 on endovascular treatment of dysfunctional and thrombosed vascular access, with an aim to illustrate the available device and procedural options. The use of paclitaxel-coated balloons, cutting balloons and covered stents is described in the field of vascular access stenosis. The broad spectrum of available devices and endovascular declotting procedures ranging from thrombolysis to thrombectomy is also discussed. Overall, in this review we demonstrate the increasing role of endovascular procedures in vascular access treatment and the improved patency outcomes provided by the implementation of novel endovascular devices. Moreover, the improvement of post-intervention primary patency rates after endovascular declotting procedures and the shift to more thrombectomy-dependent procedures over time is also highlighted. In conclusion, endovascular treatment of dialysis access stenosis and thrombosis has an established role, owing to the implementation of sophisticated devices, allowing, when needed, the simultaneous treatment of thrombosis and the underlying stenosis.

Drug Coated Balloon Angioplasty in Failing AV Fistulas: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Restenosis remains a problem in hemodialysis access interventions. Paclitaxel-coated balloons have shown promise in reducing access-related restenosis in small trials. The primary hypotheses for our multicenter trial were superior effectiveness at 180 days and noninferior safety at 30 days of a drug-coated balloon compared with conventional angioplasty for treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulas.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

This randomized trial enrolled 285 patients with dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulas at 23 centers. Grafts, central venous stenoses, thrombosed fistulas, and immature fistulas were excluded. All patients received angioplasty of the lesion responsible for access dysfunction. After successful angioplasty (≤30% residual stenosis), lesions were treated with either a paclitaxel-coated balloon or an uncoated control balloon of similar design to the drug-coated balloon. Access function during follow-up was determined per centers' usual protocols; reintervention was clinically driven. The primary efficacy outcome assessment was done at 6 months, and the safety assessment was done within 30 days of the procedure. Prespecified secondary end points included assessment of postintervention target lesion primary patency and access circuit primary patency at 6 months.

RESULTS

The 180-day end point was not met with target lesion primary patency (71%±4% for the drug-coated balloon and 63%±4% for control; P=0.06), representing a difference of 8%±6% (95% confidence interval, -3% to 20%). Access circuit primary patency did not differ between groups. Interventions to maintain target lesion patency were fewer for the drug-coated balloon at 6 months (0.31 versus 0.44 per patient; P=0.03). The primary safety noninferiority end point was met and did not differ between groups (P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Paclitaxel-coated balloon-assisted angioplasty did not meet the primary effectiveness end point at 180 days compared with conventional angioplasty. Both arms showed equivalent safety (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02440022).

A Review of Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Hemodialysis Fistula

The number of patients in dialysis increases every year. In this review, we will evaluate the role of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) according to patency of arteriovenous fistula and grafts. The main indication of PΤΑ is stenosis > 50% or obstruction of the vascular lumen of an arteriovenous fistula and graft. It is usually performed under local anesthesia. The infection rate is as low as the number of complications. Fistula can be used in dialysis in the same day without the need for a central venous catheter. Primary patency is >50% in the first year while primary assisted patency is 80-90% in the same time period. Repeated PTA is as durable as the primary PTA. An early PTA carries a risk of new interventions. Cutting balloon can be used as a second-line method. Stents and covered stents are kept for the management of complications and central outflow venous stenosis. PTA is the treatment of choice for stenosis or obstruction of dialysis fistulas. Repeated PTA may be needed for better patency. Drug eluting balloon may become the future in PTA of dialysis fistula, but more trials are needed.