-
European Heart Journal Mar 2023Optimal endovascular management of intermittent claudication (IC) remains disputed. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares efficacy and safety outcomes for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Optimal endovascular management of intermittent claudication (IC) remains disputed. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares efficacy and safety outcomes for balloon angioplasty (BA), bare-metal stents (BMS), drug-coated balloons (DCB), drug-eluting stents (DES), covered stents, and atherectomy.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Electronic databases were searched for randomized, controlled trials (RCT) from inception through November 2021. Efficacy outcomes were primary patency, target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and quality-of-life (QoL). Safety endpoints were all-cause mortality and major amputation. Outcomes were evaluated at short-term (<1 year), mid-term (1-2 years), and long-term (≥2 years) follow-up. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021292639). Fifty-one RCTs enrolling 8430 patients/lesions were included. In femoropopliteal disease of low-to-intermediate complexity, DCBs were associated with higher likelihood of primary patency [short-term: odds ratio (OR) 3.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.44-4.24; long-term: OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.93-3.16], lower TLR (short-term: OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.22-0.49; long-term: OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.60) and similar all-cause mortality risk, compared with BA. Primary stenting using BMS was associated with improved short-to-mid-term patency and TLR, but similar long-term efficacy compared with provisional stenting. Mid-term patency (OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.89-3.03) and TLR (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-1.11) estimates were comparable for DES vs. BMS. Atherectomy, used independently or adjunctively, was not associated with efficacy benefits compared with drug-coated and uncoated angioplasty, or stenting approaches. Paucity and heterogeneity of data precluded pooled analysis for aortoiliac disease and QoL endpoints.
CONCLUSION
Certain devices may provide benefits in femoropopliteal disease, but comparative data in aortoiliac arteries is lacking. Gaps in evidence quantity and quality impede identification of the optimal endovascular approach to IC.
Topics: Humans; Popliteal Artery; Vascular Patency; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Treatment Outcome; Femoral Artery; Angioplasty, Balloon; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36721954
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac722 -
Cardiovascular Revascularization... Jun 2022Rotational atherectomy (RA) plays a central role in the treatment of heavily calcified coronary artery lesions. Our aim was to compare periprocedural characteristics and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
Rotational atherectomy (RA) plays a central role in the treatment of heavily calcified coronary artery lesions. Our aim was to compare periprocedural characteristics and outcomes of planned (PA) vs. bailout (BA) rotational atherectomy.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and performed a meta-analysis on studies which compared PA vs. BA strategy.
RESULTS
Five studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, pooling a total of 2120 patients. There was no difference in procedural success, PA vs. BA risk ratio (RR) 1.03 and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.99-1.07. Compared to BA, PA was associated with a shorter procedural time [mean difference (MD) -25.88 min, 95% CI -35.55 to -16.22], less contrast volume (MD -43.71 ml, 95% CI -69.17 to -18.25), less coronary dissections (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.99), fewer stents (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.11), and a trend favouring less periprocedural myocardial infarctions (MI) (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.54-1.11). There was no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events on follow-up (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.62-1.74), death (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59-1.64), MI (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.62-2.18), target vessel revascularization (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.36), stroke (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.46-4.86) or stent thrombosis (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.06-10.74); all PA vs. BA comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to bailout RA, planned RA resulted in significantly shorter procedural times, less contrast use, lesser dissection rates and fewer stents used. The bailout RA approach appears to enhance periprocedural risk, but there is no difference on mid-term outcomes.
Topics: Atherectomy, Coronary; Coronary Artery Disease; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Retrospective Studies; Stents; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Calcification
PubMed: 34627732
DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2021.09.013 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) has several treatment options, including angioplasty, stenting, exercise therapy, and bypass surgery. Atherectomy is an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) has several treatment options, including angioplasty, stenting, exercise therapy, and bypass surgery. Atherectomy is an alternative procedure, in which atheroma is cut or ground away within the artery. This is the first update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of atherectomy for peripheral arterial disease compared to other established treatments.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 12 August 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials that compared atherectomy with other established treatments. All participants had symptomatic PAD with either claudication or critical limb ischaemia and evidence of lower limb arterial disease.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors screened studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. We resolved any disagreements through discussion. Outcomes of interest were: primary patency (at six and 12 months), all-cause mortality, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, initial technical failure rates, target vessel revascularisation rates (TVR; at six and 12 months); and complications.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven studies, with a total of 527 participants and 581 treated lesions. We found two comparisons: atherectomy versus balloon angioplasty (BA) and atherectomy versus BA with primary stenting. No studies compared atherectomy with bypass surgery. Overall, the evidence from this review was of very low certainty, due to a high risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. Six studies (372 participants, 427 treated lesions) compared atherectomy versus BA. We found no clear difference between atherectomy and BA for the primary outcomes: six-month primary patency rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.20; 3 studies, 186 participants; very low-certainty evidence); 12-month primary patency rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.84; 2 studies, 149 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or mortality rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.66, 3 studies, 210 participants, very low-certainty evidence). One study reported cardiac failure and acute coronary syndrome as causes of death at 24 months but it was unclear which arm the participants belonged to, and one study reported no cardiovascular events. There was no clear difference when examining: initial technical failure rates (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.08; 6 studies, 425 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence), six-month TVR (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.42; 2 studies, 136 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence) or 12-month TVR (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.42; 3 studies, 176 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence). All six studies reported complication rates (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.68; 6 studies, 387 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and embolisation events (RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.64 to 9.80; 6 studies, 387 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Atherectomy may be less likely to cause dissection (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 studies, 290 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and may be associated with a reduction in bailout stenting (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74; 4 studies, 315 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence). Four studies reported amputation rates, with only one amputation event recorded in a BA participant. We used subgroup analysis to compare the effect of plain balloons/stents and drug-eluting balloons/stents, but did not detect any differences between the subgroups. One study (155 participants, 155 treated lesions) compared atherectomy versus BA and primary stenting, so comparison was extremely limited and subject to imprecision. This study did not report primary patency. The study reported one death (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and three complication events (RR 7.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 62.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence) in a very small data set, making conclusions unreliable. We found no clear difference between the treatment arms in cardiovascular events (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This study found no initial technical failure events, and TVR rates at six and 24 months showed little difference between treatment arms (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.95 to 5.46; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence and RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 4.37; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence, respectively).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review update shows that the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of atherectomy on patency, mortality and cardiovascular event rates compared to plain balloon angioplasty, with or without stenting. We detected no clear differences in initial technical failure rates or TVR, but there may be reduced dissection and bailout stenting after atherectomy although this is uncertain. Included studies were small, heterogenous and at high risk of bias. Larger studies powered to detect clinically meaningful, patient-centred outcomes are required.
Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Angioplasty, Balloon; Atherectomy; Cause of Death; Heart Failure; Humans; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stents
PubMed: 32990327
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006680.pub3 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Mar 2022Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a novel technique for plaque modification during endovascular revascularisation for peripheral artery disease (PAD) with severe... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a novel technique for plaque modification during endovascular revascularisation for peripheral artery disease (PAD) with severe calcification. The aim of this paper was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary data to elucidate the efficacy and safety of IVL in lower extremity PAD.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic literature search with pre-defined search terms was performed using PubMed, Web of Sciences, OvidSP, and EMBASE.
REVIEW METHODS
A meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Patient characteristics, lesion calcification, pre-IVL and post-IVL diameter stenosis, complications, and stent rates were evaluated.
RESULTS
Nine studies were included, encompassing a total of 681 patients (769 lesions) with IVL performed for PAD, of which 75.53% (95% confidence interval [CI] 66.08% - 83.03%) of the lesions were reported to have severe calcification. Comparison between pre-IVL and post-IVL diameter stenosis demonstrated a diameter stenosis reduction of 59.3% (95% CI 53.30% - 65.31%). Vascular complications were rare, with flow limiting or type D/E/F dissection occurring in only 1.25% (95% CI 0.60% - 2.61%) of cases. The overall pooled event rate for stent placement was 15.89% (95% CI 5.22% - 39.34%).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis supports IVL as an effective and safe approach for calcified plaque modification in lower extremity PAD, achieving a diameter stenosis reduction of 59.3% (95% CI 53.30% - 65.31%) with minimal vascular complications. Routine use of this device is not recommended; further high quality evidence is required to elucidate the efficacy of IVL with respect to different clinical characteristics such as lesion location and length, and in comparison with other treatment modalities such as atherectomy.
Topics: Humans; Lithotripsy; Lower Extremity; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Calcification
PubMed: 34887206
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.10.035 -
SAGE Open Medicine 2020This review is intended to help clinicians and patients understand the present state of peripheral artery disease, appreciate the progression and presentation of... (Review)
Review
This review is intended to help clinicians and patients understand the present state of peripheral artery disease, appreciate the progression and presentation of critical limb ischemia/chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and make informed decisions regarding inflow and outflow endovascular revascularization and surgical treatment options within the context of current debates in the medical community. A controlled literature search was performed to obtain research on outcomes of critical limb ischemia patients undergoing complete leg revascularization for peripheral artery disease inflow and outflow disease. Data for this review were identified by queries of medical and life science databases, expert referral, and references from relevant papers published between 1997 and 2019, resulting in 48 articles. The literature review herein indicates that endovascular revascularization-including ballooning, stenting, and atherectomy-is an effective peripheral artery disease therapy for both above the knee and below the knee disease, and can safely and effectively treat both inflow and outflow disease. As such, it plays a leading role in the therapy of lower extremity artery disease.
PubMed: 32551113
DOI: 10.1177/2050312120929239 -
The American Journal of Cardiology Oct 2023Calcified coronary plaque (CCP) represents a challenging scenario for interventional cardiologists. Stent underexpansion (SU), often associated with CCP, can predispose... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Calcified coronary plaque (CCP) represents a challenging scenario for interventional cardiologists. Stent underexpansion (SU), often associated with CCP, can predispose to stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis. To date, SU with heavily CCP can be addressed using very high-/high-pressure noncompliant balloons, off-label rotational atherectomy/orbital atherectomy, excimer laser atherectomy, and intravascular lithotripsy (IVL). In this meta-analysis, we investigated the success rate of IVL for the treatment of SU because of CCP. Studies and case-based experiences reporting on the use of IVL strategy for treatment of SU were included. The primary end point was IVL strategy success, defined as the adequate expansion of the underexpanded stent. A metanalysis was performed for the main focuses to calculate the proportions of procedural success rates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Random-effects models weighted by inverse variance were used because of clinical heterogeneity. This meta-analysis included 13 studies with 354 patients. The mean age was 71.3 years (95% CI 64.9 to 73.1), and 77% (95% CI 71.2% to 82.4%) were male. The mean follow-up time was 2.6 months (95% CI 1 to 15.3). Strategy success was seen in 88.7% (95% CI 82.3 to 95.1) of patients. The mean minimal stent area was reported in 6 studies, the pre-IVL value was 3.4 mm (95% CI 3 to 3.8), and the post-IVL value was 6.9 mm (95% CI 6.5 to 7.4). The mean diameter stenosis (percentage) was reported in 7 studies, the pre-IVL value was 69.4% (95% CI 60.7 to 78.2), and the post-IVL value was 14.6% (95% CI 11.1 to 18). The rate of intraprocedural complications was 1.6% (95% CI 0.3 to 2.9). In conclusion, the "stent-through" IVL plaque modification technique is a safe tool to treat SU caused by CCP, with a high success rate and a very low incidence of complications.
Topics: Humans; Male; Aged; Female; Lithotripsy; Stents; Endovascular Procedures; Atherectomy; Atherectomy, Coronary; Constriction, Pathologic
PubMed: 37611414
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.07.144 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Feb 2022Atherectomy has become increasingly used as an endovascular treatment of lower extremity atherosclerotic disease in the United States. However, concerns and...
OBJECTIVE
Atherectomy has become increasingly used as an endovascular treatment of lower extremity atherosclerotic disease in the United States. However, concerns and controversies about its indications and outcomes exist. The goal of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the outcomes and complications related to atherectomy to treat femoropopliteal atherosclerotic disease.
METHODS
A systematic review in accordance with the recommendations from the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement was performed. Four major scientific repositories (MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Thompson Web of Sciences) were queried from their inception to April 5, 2020. We reviewed and entered the data in a dedicated dataset. The outcomes included the patency rates, clinical and hemodynamic improvement, and morbidity and mortality associated with atherectomy interventions.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies encompassing 1900 patients met the inclusion criteria for the present study. Of the 1900 patients, 74.3% had presented with Rutherford class 1 to 3 and 25.7% presented with Rutherford class 4 to 6; 1445 patients had undergone atherectomy, and 455 patients had been treated without atherectomy. The atherectomy group had undergone directional atherectomy (n = 851), rotational atherectomy (n = 851), laser atherectomy (n = 201), and orbital atherectomy (n = 78). Most of these patients had also received adjunct treatments, which varied across the studies and included a combination of stenting, balloon angioplasty, or drug-coated balloon angioplasty. Technical success was achieved in 92.3% of the cases. Distal embolization, vessel perforation, and dissection occurred in 3.4%, 1.9%, and 4% of the cases, respectively. The initial patency was 95.4%. At the 12-month median follow-up, the primary patency was 72.6%. The ankle brachial index had improved from a preoperative mean of 0.6 to a postoperative mean of 0.84. The incidence of major amputation and mortality during the follow-up period was 2.2% and 3.4%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The results from our review of the reported data suggest that femoropopliteal atherectomy can be completed safely, modestly improving the ankle brachial index and maintaining the 1-year patency in nearly three of four patients. However, these findings were based on heterogeneous studies that skewed the generalizable conclusions about atherectomy's efficacy. Atherectomy places a high cost burden on the healthcare system and is used in the United States at a higher rate than in other countries. Our review of the literature did not demonstrate clear atherectomy superiority to alternatives that would warrant the pervasive and increasing use of this costly technology. Future work should focus on developing high-quality randomized controlled trials to determine the specific patient and lesion characteristics for which atherectomy can add value.
Topics: Angioplasty, Balloon; Atherectomy; Atherosclerosis; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Femoral Artery; Humans; Intermittent Claudication; Popliteal Artery; Stents; Vascular Patency
PubMed: 34303802
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.07.106 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Jul 2021The efficacy and cost effectiveness of atherectomy for femoropopliteal (FP) arterial diseases have not been determined yet. A systematic review and meta-analysis were... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Atherectomy Combined with Balloon Angioplasty versus Balloon Angioplasty Alone for de Novo Femoropopliteal Arterial Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
The efficacy and cost effectiveness of atherectomy for femoropopliteal (FP) arterial diseases have not been determined yet. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the efficacy and safety between atherectomy combined with balloon angioplasty (BA) and BA alone for patients with de novo FP steno-occlusive lesions.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase were used to search for studies evaluating outcomes of atherectomy combined with BA compared with BA alone in FP arterial diseases from inception to July 2020. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to assess the level of evidence for each outcome. The fixed effects model was chosen to combine the data when I < 50%; otherwise, the random effects model was used. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to further analyse the results.
RESULTS
Four RCTs were included. The meta-analysis showed that atherectomy combined with BA was associated with improved technical success rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.38, p < .001; I = 0; high quality), reduced bailout stenting (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.07-0.32, p < .001; I = 16%; high quality), and flow limiting dissection (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.47, p < .001; I = 0; high quality). No statistically significant difference was found in target lesion revascularisation (TLR), primary patency, mortality, major adverse event (MAE), or ankle brachial index (ABI) after one year follow up.
CONCLUSION
Compared with BA alone, atherectomy combined with BA may not improve primary patency, TLR, mortality rate, or ABI, but may reduce the need for bailout stenting and the incidence of flow limiting dissection and increase the technical success rate in FP arterial diseases. More studies are warranted to further confirm the conclusion.
Topics: Aortic Dissection; Angioplasty, Balloon; Ankle Brachial Index; Atherectomy; Combined Modality Therapy; Femoral Artery; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stents; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Patency
PubMed: 34112574
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.02.012 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2022Severely calcified coronary lesions with reduced left ventricular (LV) function result in worse outcomes. Atherectomy is used in treating such lesions when technically...
Outcomes of atherectomy in treating severely calcified coronary lesions in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Severely calcified coronary lesions with reduced left ventricular (LV) function result in worse outcomes. Atherectomy is used in treating such lesions when technically feasible. However, there is limited data examining the safety and efficacy of atherectomy without hemodynamic support in treating severely calcified coronary lesions in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the clinical outcomes of atherectomy in patient with reduced LVEF.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL Register and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception through July 21, 2021) for studies evaluating the outcomes of atherectomy in patients with severe LV dysfunction. We used random-effect model to calculate risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The endpoints were in-hospital and long term all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR).
RESULTS
A total of 7 studies consisting of 2,238 unique patients were included in the analysis. The median follow-up duration was 22.4 months. The risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality using atherectomy in patients with severely reduced LVEF compared to the patients with moderate reduced or preserved LVEF was [2.4vs.0.5%; RR:5.28; 95%CI 1.65-16.84; = 0.005], the risk of long term all-cause mortality was [21 vs. 8.8%; RR of 2.84; 95% CI 1.16-6.95; = 0.02]. In-hospital TVR risk was 2.0 vs. 0.6% (RR: 4.15; 95% CI 4.15-15.67; = 0.04) and long-term TVR was [6.0 vs. 9.9%; RR of 0.75; 95% CI 0.39-1.42; = 0.37]. In-hospital MI was [7.1 vs. 5.4%; RR 1.63; 95% CI 0.91-2.93; = 0.10], long-term MI was [7.5 vs. 5.7; RR 1.74; 95%CI 0.95-3.18; = 0.07).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis suggested that the patients with severely reduced LVEF when using atherectomy devices experienced higher risk of clinical outcomes in the terms of all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality. As we know that the patients with severely reduced LVEF are inherently at increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes, this information should be considered hypothesis generating and utilized while discussing the risks and benefits of atherectomy in such high risk patients. Future studies should focus on the comparison of outcomes of different atherectomy devices in such patients. Adjusting for the inherent mortality risk posed by left ventricular dysfunction may be a strategy while designing a study.
PubMed: 36204563
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.946027 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Jan 2024Interventional cardiologists face challenges in managing chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions, with conflicting results when comparing rotational atherectomy (RA) to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Safety and feasibility of rotational atherectomy (RA) versus conventional stenting in patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Interventional cardiologists face challenges in managing chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions, with conflicting results when comparing rotational atherectomy (RA) to conventional PCI. This meta-analysis aims to provide a critical evaluation of the safety and feasibility of RA in CTO lesions.
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid, and Cochrane central library until April 2023 were searched for relevant studies. MACE was our primary outcomes, other outcomes were all cause of death, cardiac death, MI, and TVR. Also, we reported angiographic outcomes as technical success, procedural success, and procedural complications in a random effect model. The pooled data was analyzed using odds ratio (OR) with its 95% CI using STATA 17 MP.
RESULTS
Seven studies comprising 5494 patients with a mean follow-up of 43.1 months were included in this meta-analysis. Our pooled analysis showed that RA was comparable to PCI to decrease the incidence of MACE (OR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.74 to 1.3], p = 0.9). Moreover, there was no significant difference between RA and conventional PCI in terms of other clinical or angiographic outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Our study showed that RA had comparable clinical and angiographic outcomes as conventional PCI in CTO lesions, which offer interventional cardiologists an expanded perspective when addressing calcified lesions.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42023417362.
Topics: Humans; Atherectomy, Coronary; Chronic Disease; Coronary Occlusion; Feasibility Studies; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38166554
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-023-03673-2