Comparing Endovascular Approaches in Lower Extremity Artery Disease: Insights from a Network Meta-Analysis

• Published in: Journal of clinical medicine 2024-02, Vol.13 (4), p.1024
• Main Authors: Lukacs, Reka Aliz, Weisshaar, Lisa Ingrid, Tornyos, Daniel, Komocsi, Andras
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Amputation; Arterial occlusions; Blood vessels; Care and treatment; Clinical trials; Ischemia; Leg surgery; Mortality; Patients; Stents; Surgery; Surgery, Experimental; Surgical research; Vein & artery diseases
• ISSN: 2077-0383; 2077-0383
• DOI: 10.3390/jcm13041024

Endovascular therapy offers an alternative for treating femoropopliteal (FP) and infrapopliteal (IP) lesions related to occlusive lower extremity artery disease. Despite numerous trials, the effectiveness of restenosis prevention using local drug delivery devices remains a topic of debate. An updated systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted. Our overall aim was to summarize the most recent clinical evidence regarding endovascular approaches for FP and IP atherosclerotic lesions. We conducted a search for randomized trials in the MEDLINE database, and extracted data related to clinical endpoints. Our primary focus was on the rate of major adverse events (MAEs), including mortality, amputation, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). A multiple treatment network meta-analysis supplemented with component network analyses was performed to examine the impact of combined treatment. Our search yielded 33 randomized controlled trials encompassing 5766 patients. This included 19 studies focused on femoropopliteal and 14 on IP lesions, accounting for 3565 and 2201 patients, respectively. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and drug-eluting stents (DESs) displayed a reduced MAE risk in comparison to plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA)-RR for DCB: 0.64 (95% CI: 0.52-0.77) and for DES: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.51-0.99). The bare-metal stent (BMS) group manifested the most substantial MAE risk, being 59% higher relative to the DCB cohort (BMS vs. DCB RR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.03-2.47). For FP lesions, DES was the standout performer, curtailing MAE risk by 55% relative to POBA. Within IP lesions, DES mitigated the MAE risk by 25% versus POBA. DCB did not exhibit any notable MAE reduction when pitted against POBA. In FP arteries, both DESs and DCBs yielded significantly diminished MAEs, thus outpacing other techniques. Regarding IP arteries, only DESs resulted in significantly fewer MAEs. In alignment with contemporary research, our findings revealed no signs of elevated mortality in patients undergoing treatment with drug-eluting apparatuses.