A randomized controlled trial of drug-coated balloon angioplasty in venous anastomotic stenosis of dialysis arteriovenous grafts

The Alpha to Omega of Dialysis Access: Evaluation, Interventions, Innovations (Part 2)

Background: End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a growing global health concern, significantly impacting patient morbidity and mortality, particularly among patients on hemodialysis. Vascular access remains a major challenge, often limiting the effectiveness of hemodialysis and requiring strategic planning to optimize outcomes. Purpose: This review examines the current evidence on vascular access for dialysis, with a focus on pre- and post-operative assessments, necessary interventions for complications, and innovations in vascular access materials and techniques. Research Design: This is a literature review analyzing existing studies, clinical trials and guidelines to evaluate the different vascular access options, interventions, and emerging technologies in dialysis access. Results: Findings highlight the importance of thorough preoperative assessment, including vascular imaging and patient-specific considerations, to optimize access placement. Postoperative assessments and early interventions are crucial in ensuring access longevity. Innovations such as drug-coated balloons, stent technologies, and biologically engineered grafts have improved patient outcomes and reduced complications. Conclusion: Strategic planning and advancements in vascular access technology play a critical role in improving dialysis efficiency and patient outcomes. Continued research and innovation are needed to refine vascular access techniques and address challenges associated with ESKD management.

Efficacy of drug-coated balloon versus uncoated balloon for dysfunctional dialysis access: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dysfunctional vascular access is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing hemodialysis, affecting both arteriovenous fistulas and grafts. The most optimal strategy to restore long-term patency has not been established. This meta-analysis compares drug-coated balloon (DCB) versus uncoated balloon (UCB) angioplasty for dysfunctional vascular access.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search across multiple databases from inception to June 2024. Randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DCB and UCB in dialysis patients with dysfunctional vascular access were included. Risk ratios were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven RCTs (2645 patients) were included. Target lesion patency (TLP) at 6 months was significantly superior in the DCB group (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07-1.39, p = 0.003). The two regimens were comparable for TLP at 3 months (RR 1.14, p = 0.24) and 12 months (RR 1.14, p = 0.10). The two regimens were comparable in terms of circuit patency rate, target-lesion revascularization, and all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

DCB has significantly superior TLP and a comparable risk of mortality to UCB. Further research is warranted to identify factors affecting outcomes following DCB angioplasty for dysfunctional dialysis access.

Comparison of the efficacy of drug-coated balloon angioplasty and conventional balloon angioplasty in the endovascular treatment of thrombosed arteriovenous dialysis fistulas

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty in the treatment of thrombosed arteriovenous fistulas.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, controlled study investigated the use of drug-eluting balloons in the treatment of the thrombosis of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) at our center between January 2018 and January 2023. A total of 246 patients were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 61.3 ± 11.5 years. Of the patients, 150 (61%) were male and 96 (39%) were female. Angioplasty was performed using a plain balloon (PB) in 126 patients (51.2%) and a drug-coated balloon (DCB) in 120 (48.8%). The control images of the patients were obtained at the sixth and 12th months. Patency was evaluated during the follow-up.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, fistula location, or stenosis length. No significant difference was observed between the groups regarding the number of complications observed during and after the procedure. At the end of the sixth month, the patency rate was found to be 86.7% in the DCB group and 78.6% in the PB group. The 12th-month patency rate was 77.5% in the DCB group and 57.9% in the PB group. A significant difference was detected between the two groups in relation to the 6th- and 12th-month patency rates (p = 0.034 and p = 0.046, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty is an effective approach to the treatment of thrombosed AVFs, especially in terms of prolonging primary patency and reducing the need for secondary procedures.

Effectiveness of Initial and Repeat Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty of Restenotic Arteriovenous Fistulae Compared with That of Plain Angioplasty

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of drug-coated balloon (DCB) with high-dose paclitaxel for the treatment of restenotic dysfunctional arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-arm, multicenter, prospective, observational study, 334 patients who underwent DCB angioplasty using IN.PACT AV (Medtronic, Plymouth, Minnesota) for the first time for restenotic lesions of dysfunctional AVFs between April 2021 and March 2022 were registered. Outcomes were compared with the outcomes of plain angioplasty performed previously, leading up to the restenosis.

RESULTS

Procedural success, defined as <30% residual stenosis, was achieved in 96.7% of cases. During a median follow-up of 7.4 months, 179 target lesion reinterventions (TLRs) were observed, and the 6-month freedom from TLR was 73.2% (68.2%-78.2%). When compared with the previous plain angioplasty, the median time to reintervention was significantly longer with DCB (9.1 [8.0-10.6] vs 3.2 [3.0-3.4] months; P < .001). Baseline characteristics that were independently associated with TLR were as follows: months from the last intervention (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.50 [95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.62] per doubling; P < .001), partial lesion coverage by DCB (2.13 [1.10-4.12]; P = .024), and residual stenosis after DCB (2.19 [1.53-3.12] per 15% increase; P < .001) with its time interaction (0.91 [0.86-0.97] per month; P = .003). Of the 179 TLRs, 84 used DCB once again. The median time to reintervention was significantly longer for TLR using DCB (7.1 [6.2-9.7] vs 3.3 [3.1-4.0] months; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

DCB with high-dose paclitaxel is effective at both the initial treatment of restenotic lesions of dysfunctional AVFs and during TLR after DCB use. Partial lesion coverage by DCB and residual stenosis may compromise patency.

An unconventional hemodialysis vascular access through graft-vein fistula

An abnormal fistulation occurring between a prosthetic dialysis graft and an adjacent native vein is a rare complication. However, in our patient, this abnormality ended up preserving the patency of his hemodialysis vascular access. We present a case of an unconventional hemodialysis vascular access making use of the graft-vein fistula.

Safety and Performance of a Cell-Impermeable Endoprosthesis for Hemodialysis Vascular Access Outflow Stenosis: A Brazilian Multicenter Retrospective Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and performance of Wrapsody™, a cell-impermeable endoprosthesis (CIE), for treating hemodialysis vascular access outflow stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Investigators retrospectively analyzed 113 hemodialysis patients treated with a CIE (11/2021-12/2022) across four centers in Brazil. De novo or restenotic lesions were treated. The primary efficacy outcome measure was target lesion primary patency (TLPP) at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months; the primary safety outcome measure was the absence of serious local or systemic adverse events within the first 30 days post-procedure. Secondary outcome measures included technical and procedural success, access circuit primary patency (ACPP), and secondary patency at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-procedure.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients (34.5%) had thrombosed access at the initial presentation, and 38 patients (33.6%) presented with recurrent stenosis. TLPP rates at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months were 100%, 96.4%, 86.4%, and 69.7%, respectively. ACPP rates were 100% at 1 month, 89.2% at 3 months, 70.9% at 6 months, and 56.0% at 12 months. The target lesion secondary patency rates at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months were 100%, 97.3%, 93.6%, and 91.7%, respectively. In the adjusted multivariate Cox regression analysis, male sex and endoprosthesis with diameters of 10, 12, 14, and 16 mm were associated with improved primary patency rates. No localized or systemic serious adverse event was observed through the first 30 days post-procedure.

CONCLUSION

The CIE evaluated in this study is safe and effective for treating peripheral and central outflow stenoses in hemodialysis vascular access.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2b, cohort study.

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.

Sirolimus-coated balloon angioplasty in maintaining the patency of thrombosed arteriovenous graft: 1-year results of a prospective study

BACKGROUND

A prospective, pilot study was designed to test the feasibility of using sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) to treat graft vein junction of thrombosed arteriovenous graft (AVG) following successful pharmacomechanical thrombectomy. The present report provides the 1-year results of this study.

METHODS

This is a 1-year follow-up of a single, prospective, single-arm study that was conducted from 2018 to 2019 in 20 patients who presented to a tertiary institution with thrombosed AVG. The recruited patients received SCB angioplasty at the graft-vein junction following successful endovascular thrombectomy of a thrombosed AVG. One year after recruitment, there were three deaths, one AVG revision, and one AVG explantation among the participants recruited. The outcomes of 15 subjects at 1-year following the index procedure obtained from electronic medical records were re-examined.

RESULTS

The 1-year access circuit primary patency rate was 40%, while assisted primary and secondary patency rates were 46.7% and 73.3%, respectively. A total of 16 interventions (4 angioplasties, 12 thrombectomies) were performed in 9 patients over the 12 months. Four AVGs were abandoned. The median number of interventions per patient was 1 (0-3) per year. Using Kaplan-Meier analysis, the mean estimated post-intervention access circuit primary patency was 230 (95% CI: 162-300) days, while access circuit assisted primary patency was 253 (95% CI: 187-320) days, and access circuit secondary patency was 292 (95% CI: 230-356) days. Sub-group analysis did not show a significant difference in the mean estimated primary patency between AVG with de novo and recurrent stenosis (245 days, 95% CI: 151-339 vs 210 days, 95% CI: 113-307; p = 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

SCB may help sustain the patency of thrombosed AVG following successful thrombectomy.

Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of APERTO-Paclitaxel Drug-Eluting Balloon Angioplasty Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Dysfunctional Hemodialysis Grafts and Native Fistulae

PURPOSE

to assess the safety and efficacy of APERTO-Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty versus standard angioplasty for the treatment of dysfunctional hemodialysis shunts and native arteriovenous fistulae.

METHODS

consecutive patients with dysfunctional dialysis related to underlying efferent vein stenosis were included and randomized 1:1 to either APERTO-paclitaxel drug-coated balloon (study arm) or standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (control arm). Primary endpoint is time from treatment until dialysis access dysfunction according to standardized Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI)-guidelines and assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival curves and tested for significance with log-rank analysis. Secondary endpoints include device, technical, and clinical success of the index angioplasty procedure.

RESULTS

The study included 103 patients (n=51 study-group) with a de novo (n=33) dysfunctional native arteriovenous fistula (n=79) in the forearm (n=60). The majority of included patients were male with a mean age of 69.8 years, presenting with a dysfunctioning autologous arteriovenous fistula in the forearm. Device-related complications did not occur in any of the included patients. Functional hemodialysis access without need for re-intervention at 1 year after index procedure was found in n=10 (19.6%) and n=5 (9.6%) of patients treated with, respectively, paclitaxel drug-coated balloon and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (p=0.612). A nonsignificant benefit of paclitaxel drug-coated balloon (n=5; 25%) over percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (n=1; 11%) was found (p=0.953) in de novo lesions in autologous fistulas.

CONCLUSION

APERTO-paclitaxel drug-coated balloon is a safe balloon catheter to manage dysfunctional hemodialysis access; however, longer period of adequate hemodialysis circuit functioning after endovascular index stenosis treatment, using APERTO-paclitaxel drug-coated balloon versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty could not be demonstrated.

CLINICAL IMPACT

APERTO-paclitaxel drug-coated balloon catheter is a safe device to manage dysfunctional hemodialysis access. Compared to conventional angioplasty balloon, the APERTO drug-coated balloon will not result in longer period of adequate hemodialysis circuit functioning. A non-significant benefit of APERTO drug-coated balloon was found in de novo lesions in autologous fistulas.

Long-term mortality and patency after drug-coated balloon angioplasty in the hemodialysis circuit: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To compare all-cause mortality and primary patency with drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCBA) compared with plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) in people with hemodialysis-related stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from November 1966 to February 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the use of DCBA versus PBA for stenosis in hemodialysis circuits. Data extracted from the articles were integrated to determine all-cause mortality, target lesion primary patency (TLPP), circuit access primary patency (CAPP), 30-day adverse events, and technical success for the two approaches. We performed meta-analysis on these results using a fixed-effects model to evaluate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) where I2 < 50% in a test for heterogeneity, or a random-effect model if otherwise. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs of 1672 individuals were included in our meta-analysis, of which 839 individuals received DCBA and 833 received PBA. The pooled outcome showed no statistical difference between DCBA and PBA in all-cause mortality at 6 months (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.72-2.32, p = 0.39, I2 = 4%), 12 months (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.68-1.53, p = 0.91, I2 = 0%), and 24 months (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 0.87-2.57, p = 0.15, I2 = 0%), 30-day adverse events (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.30-3.98, p = 0.90, I2 = 66%), and technical success (OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.02-1.92, p = 0.16, I2 = 65%). The DCBA had significantly better outcomes versus PBA in TLPP at 6 months (OR = 2.37, 95% CI = 1.84-3.04, p < 0.001, I2 = 44%) and 12 months (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.22-2.56, p = 0.002, I2 = 56%), and CAPP at 6 months (OR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.21-3.54, p = 0.008, I2 = 67%) and 12 months (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.29-2.15, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

In hemodialysis circuit stenosis, DCBA appears to have similar safety but greater efficacy than PBA.

A Randomised Trial Comparing Drug Coated Balloons and Conventional Balloons for the Treatment of Stent Graft Stenosis in Dialysis Vascular Access

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies on arteriovenous fistulas have demonstrated the potential benefit of drug coated balloons (DCBs) in maintaining the patency of dialysis access. However, stenoses involving stent grafts were excluded from these studies. Therefore, the aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of DCBs in treating stent graft stenosis.

METHODS

This was a prospective, single blinded, randomised controlled study. From March 2017 to April 2021, 40 patients with dysfunctional vascular access owing to stent graft stenosis were randomised to treatment with a DCB or conventional balloon. Clinical follow up was scheduled at one, three, and six months, and angiographic follow up was performed six months after the intervention. The primary outcome was angiographic late luminal loss at six months, and secondary outcomes included target lesion and access circuit primary patency at six months.

RESULTS

Thirty-six participants completed follow up angiography. The DCB group had a superior mean late luminal loss at six months compared with the control group (1.82 mm ± 1.83 mm vs. 3.63 mm ± 1.08 mm, respectively, p = .001). All 40 patients completed clinical follow up. The DCB group had a superior six month target lesion primary patency compared with the control group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 - 0.71; p = .005). Additionally, the DCB group had a numerically higher six month access circuit primary patency rate than the control group, although the difference was not statistically significant (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.26 - 1.11, p = .095).

CONCLUSION

Conventional balloon angioplasty is not durable in stent graft stenosis treatment. Treatment with DCBs provides less angiographic late luminal loss and potentially superior primary patency of the target lesion than treatment with conventional balloons. [ClinicalTrials ID: NCT03360279.].

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.

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.

Editor's Choice - Paclitaxel Coated Balloon Angioplasty vs. Plain Balloon Angioplasty for Haemodialysis Arteriovenous Access Stenosis: A Systematic Review and a Time to Event Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to determine the effectiveness and safety of drug coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty compared with uncoated plain balloon (PB) angioplasty in treating arteriovenous access stenosis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCTs comparing paclitaxel coated DCB and PB angioplasty for arteriovenous access stenosis. The last date of the literature search was 31 December 2020. Risk of bias of the retrieved studies was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias (RoB 2.0). The random effects model was used to estimate the risk of loss of target lesion patency (six and 12 months) and circuit patency (six and 12 months). Procedure related adverse events and mortality rate were also compared. Patency results were pooled using the time to event meta-analytical method and the quality of evidence was assessed according to the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Sixteen eligible trials, including 1 682 lesions, were included in the quantitative analysis for the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel coated DCBs. DCBs were associated with a lower risk of loss of target lesion patency at six months (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42 - 0.66) and 12 months (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.76), and were also associated with improved six and 12 month circuit patency. Overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Procedural complications were rare, and the risk of death up to 12 months was similar between the two groups (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.68 - 1.56).

CONCLUSION

Paclitaxel coated DCBs reduced the risk of loss of target lesion patency and circuit patency in arteriovenous access stenosis compared with PBs. Considering the heterogeneity of the included trials, there is a need to investigate optimal treatment regimens regarding drug dose and agent of the DCB and the treatment procedure.

Drug Coated Balloons for Dysfunctional Haemodialysis Venous Access: A Patient Level Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To perform an individual patient data level meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing drug coated balloon angioplasty (DCB) against conventional percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) in the treatment of dysfunctional haemodialysis venous access.

METHODS

A search was conducted from inception to 13 November 2020. Kaplan-Meier curves comparing DCB with PTA by target lesion primary patency (TLPP) and access circuit primary patency (ACPP) were graphically reconstructed to retrieve patient level data. One stage meta-analyses with Cox models with random effects shared frailties were conducted to determine hazard ratios (HRs). Dynamic restricted mean survival times (RMST) were conducted in view of violation of the proportional hazards assumption. Conventional two stage meta-analyses and network meta-analyses under random effects Frequentist models were conducted to determine overall and comparative outcomes of paclitaxel concentrations used. Where outliers were consistently detected through outlier and influence analyses, sensitivity analyses excluding those studies were conducted.

RESULTS

Among 10 RCTs (1 207 patients), HRs across all models favoured DCB (one stage shared frailty HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.53 - 0.73, p < .001; two stage random effects HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 - 0.86, p = .018, I² = 65%) for TLPP. Evidence of time varying effects (p = .005) was found. TLPP RMST was + 3.54 months (25.0%) longer in DCB treated patients compared with PTA (p = .001) at three years. TLPP at six months, one year, and two years was 75.3% vs. 58.1%, 51.1% vs. 37.1%, and 31.4% vs. 26.0% for DCB and PTA, respectively. The P-Scores within the Frequentist network meta-analysis suggest that higher concentrations of paclitaxel were associated with better TLPP and ACPP. Among six RCTs (854 patients), the one stage model favoured DCB (shared frailty HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60 - 0.87, p < .001) for ACPP. Conversely, the two stage random effects model demonstrated no significant difference (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.35 - 1.67, p = .41, I² = 81%). Sensitivity analysis excluding outliers significantly favoured DCB (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 - 0.91, p = .027, I² = 62%).

CONCLUSION

Overall evidence suggests that DCB is favoured over PTA in TLPP and ACPP.

New Devices and Technologies for Hemodialysis Vascular Access: A Review

In the United States, hemodialysis remains the most common treatment modality for kidney failure, chosen by almost 90% of incident patients. A functioning vascular access is key to providing adequate hemodialysis therapy. Recently, major innovations in devices and technology for hemodialysis vascular access care have rapidly changed the landscape. Novel endovascular devices for creation of arteriovenous fistulas may offer a solution to the barriers encountered in initiating maintenance hemodialysis with a permanent vascular access rather than a central venous catheter (CVC). Furthermore, in the prevalent hemodialysis population, the minimally invasive endovascular arteriovenous fistula procedure should help improve long wait times for vascular access creation, which remains a major barrier to reducing CVC dependence. Bioengineered grafts are being developed and may offer another option to polytetrafluoroethylene grafts. Early studies with these biocompatible grafts are promising, as additional studies continue to evaluate their clinical outcomes in comparison to cryopreserved or synthetic options. Prolonging the vascular access patency with appropriate use of devices such as drug-coated balloons and stent grafts may complement the novel techniques of creating arteriovenous access. Finally, innovative solutions to treat stenosed and occluded thoracic central veins can provide an approach to creating a vascular access and allow patients with exhausted vasculature to remain on hemodialysis. The robust developments in hemodialysis vascular access are likely to change practice patterns in the near future.

Single-Center Prospective Pilot Study of Sirolimus Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty in Maintaining the Patency of Thrombosed Arteriovenous Graft

PURPOSE

To investigate the use of a sirolimus drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the management of a thrombosed arteriovenous graft (AVG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center prospective pilot study was conducted between October 2018 and October 2019. Twenty patients (age = 67.0 years ± 10; male = 35%; mean time on dialysis = 31 months) with thrombosed upper limb AVG were enrolled. After successful pharmacomechanical thrombectomy and adequate treatment of the graft vein junction, sirolimus DCB angioplasty was performed at the graft vein junction. The patients were followed-up for 6 months, and all adverse events occurring during the study period were recorded.

RESULTS

The primary circuit patency rates at 3 and 6 months were 76% and 65%, respectively, while the assisted-primary circuit patency rates at 3 and 6 months were 82% and 65%, respectively. The 3- and 6-month secondary circuit patency rates were 88% and 76%, respectively. Using Kaplan-Meier analyses, the estimated mean primary, assisted-primary, and secondary patencies were 285 days (95% confidence interval (CI) = 194-376 days), 319 days (95% CI = 221-416 days), and 409 days (95% CI = 333-485 days). No adverse event directly related to sirolimus DCB use was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pilot study suggest that the application of sirolimus DCB at the graft vein junction after the successful thrombectomy of AVG may be a feasible option to improve patency outcomes.

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.

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)