Comparison of treatment strategies for femoro‐popliteal disease: A network meta‐analysis

Objectives We sought to compare treatment strategies in a Bayesian network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a prevalent morbidity that is treated with various strategies. Methods We performed a MEDLINE search for randomized studies comparin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions 2018-06, Vol.91 (7), p.1320-1328
Hauptverfasser: Koifman, Edward, Lipinski, Michael J., Buchanan, Kyle, Yu Kang, Won, Escarcega, Ricardo O., Waksman, Ron, Bernardo, Nelson L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1328
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1320
container_title Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions
container_volume 91
creator Koifman, Edward
Lipinski, Michael J.
Buchanan, Kyle
Yu Kang, Won
Escarcega, Ricardo O.
Waksman, Ron
Bernardo, Nelson L.
description Objectives We sought to compare treatment strategies in a Bayesian network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a prevalent morbidity that is treated with various strategies. Methods We performed a MEDLINE search for randomized studies comparing at least 2 treatment strategies, including bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) balloons, stents, covered stents, drug‐eluting stents (DES), and drug‐coated balloons (DCB), in patients with native femoro‐popliteal disease. Mixed treatment comparison model generation was performed to directly and indirectly compare the strategies in terms of restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) presented as odds ratios (OR, [95% credible intervals]). Results Twenty‐nine studies with 4,820 patients were included in the present study. PTA was the largest group with 1,900 patients, followed by DCB (n = 1,343), bare metal stents (n = 941), covered stents (n = 304), DES (n = 236), and bypass (n = 92). Mean age was 68 ± 9 years, 64% were male, 37% diabetic, and 55% smokers. Mean lesion length was 77 ± 44 mm, and 39% were total occlusions. Bayesian hierarchical random‐effects model demonstrated all treatments were significantly better than, or had a trend toward superiority over, PTA, with DCB ranking well in both restenosis (OR = 0.29, [0.17‐0.47]) and TLR (OR = 0.31, [0.20‐0.46]). Nonetheless, none of the therapies showed superiority in terms of survival or amputations. Conclusion Treatment of femoro‐popliteal disease has significantly evolved in recent years, with higher rates of patency and freedom from TLR. However, the utility of these treatment strategies in terms of reduction of amputations and overall survival remains in question.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/ccd.27484
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1989587710</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2053563699</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4194-99777a276a8c452c11dd4266b8f87668a6e1a738a388fdc2dfd2aafbcb184b193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtq3DAUhkVoaS7tIi9QBN00i0kk2dalu-DmBoFuWsgiII7lo-LEthxJQ5hdHiHP2CeJk5lkUcjqnMXHx89HyD5nh5wxceRceyhUqcstssMrIRZKyKsPm5-bUm6T3ZRuGGNGCvOJbAtTFKLg1Q65rsMwQexSGGnwNEeEPOCYacoRMv7tMFEfIvU4hBj-PTxOYeq7jNDTtksICX_QYzpivg_xlg6YYWZghH6VuvSZfPTQJ_yyuXvkz-nJ7_p8cfnr7KI-vly4cl63MEYpBUJJ0K6shOO8bUshZaO9VlJqkMhBFRoKrX3rROtbAeAb13BdNtwUe-T72jvFcLfElO3QJYd9DyOGZbLcaFNppTib0W__oTdhGee9yQpWFZUspHkWHqwpF0NKEb2dYjdAXFnO7HNyOye3L8ln9uvGuGwGbN_I18YzcLQG7rseV--bbF3_XCufAOsyjOI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2053563699</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of treatment strategies for femoro‐popliteal disease: A network meta‐analysis</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Koifman, Edward ; Lipinski, Michael J. ; Buchanan, Kyle ; Yu Kang, Won ; Escarcega, Ricardo O. ; Waksman, Ron ; Bernardo, Nelson L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Koifman, Edward ; Lipinski, Michael J. ; Buchanan, Kyle ; Yu Kang, Won ; Escarcega, Ricardo O. ; Waksman, Ron ; Bernardo, Nelson L.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives We sought to compare treatment strategies in a Bayesian network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a prevalent morbidity that is treated with various strategies. Methods We performed a MEDLINE search for randomized studies comparing at least 2 treatment strategies, including bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) balloons, stents, covered stents, drug‐eluting stents (DES), and drug‐coated balloons (DCB), in patients with native femoro‐popliteal disease. Mixed treatment comparison model generation was performed to directly and indirectly compare the strategies in terms of restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) presented as odds ratios (OR, [95% credible intervals]). Results Twenty‐nine studies with 4,820 patients were included in the present study. PTA was the largest group with 1,900 patients, followed by DCB (n = 1,343), bare metal stents (n = 941), covered stents (n = 304), DES (n = 236), and bypass (n = 92). Mean age was 68 ± 9 years, 64% were male, 37% diabetic, and 55% smokers. Mean lesion length was 77 ± 44 mm, and 39% were total occlusions. Bayesian hierarchical random‐effects model demonstrated all treatments were significantly better than, or had a trend toward superiority over, PTA, with DCB ranking well in both restenosis (OR = 0.29, [0.17‐0.47]) and TLR (OR = 0.31, [0.20‐0.46]). Nonetheless, none of the therapies showed superiority in terms of survival or amputations. Conclusion Treatment of femoro‐popliteal disease has significantly evolved in recent years, with higher rates of patency and freedom from TLR. However, the utility of these treatment strategies in terms of reduction of amputations and overall survival remains in question.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1522-1946</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-726X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ccd.27484</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29332315</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Angioplasty ; Bayesian analysis ; Clinical trials ; Diabetes mellitus ; Implants ; Medical equipment ; Medical treatment ; Meta-analysis ; Morbidity ; outcome ; Patients ; peripheral artery disease ; Randomization ; Restenosis ; Stents ; Surgery ; target lesion revascularization ; Vascular diseases</subject><ispartof>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 2018-06, Vol.91 (7), p.1320-1328</ispartof><rights>2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4194-99777a276a8c452c11dd4266b8f87668a6e1a738a388fdc2dfd2aafbcb184b193</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4194-99777a276a8c452c11dd4266b8f87668a6e1a738a388fdc2dfd2aafbcb184b193</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4063-9226</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fccd.27484$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fccd.27484$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29332315$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Koifman, Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lipinski, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchanan, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu Kang, Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escarcega, Ricardo O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waksman, Ron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernardo, Nelson L.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of treatment strategies for femoro‐popliteal disease: A network meta‐analysis</title><title>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</title><addtitle>Catheter Cardiovasc Interv</addtitle><description>Objectives We sought to compare treatment strategies in a Bayesian network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a prevalent morbidity that is treated with various strategies. Methods We performed a MEDLINE search for randomized studies comparing at least 2 treatment strategies, including bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) balloons, stents, covered stents, drug‐eluting stents (DES), and drug‐coated balloons (DCB), in patients with native femoro‐popliteal disease. Mixed treatment comparison model generation was performed to directly and indirectly compare the strategies in terms of restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) presented as odds ratios (OR, [95% credible intervals]). Results Twenty‐nine studies with 4,820 patients were included in the present study. PTA was the largest group with 1,900 patients, followed by DCB (n = 1,343), bare metal stents (n = 941), covered stents (n = 304), DES (n = 236), and bypass (n = 92). Mean age was 68 ± 9 years, 64% were male, 37% diabetic, and 55% smokers. Mean lesion length was 77 ± 44 mm, and 39% were total occlusions. Bayesian hierarchical random‐effects model demonstrated all treatments were significantly better than, or had a trend toward superiority over, PTA, with DCB ranking well in both restenosis (OR = 0.29, [0.17‐0.47]) and TLR (OR = 0.31, [0.20‐0.46]). Nonetheless, none of the therapies showed superiority in terms of survival or amputations. Conclusion Treatment of femoro‐popliteal disease has significantly evolved in recent years, with higher rates of patency and freedom from TLR. However, the utility of these treatment strategies in terms of reduction of amputations and overall survival remains in question.</description><subject>Angioplasty</subject><subject>Bayesian analysis</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Diabetes mellitus</subject><subject>Implants</subject><subject>Medical equipment</subject><subject>Medical treatment</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>outcome</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>peripheral artery disease</subject><subject>Randomization</subject><subject>Restenosis</subject><subject>Stents</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>target lesion revascularization</subject><subject>Vascular diseases</subject><issn>1522-1946</issn><issn>1522-726X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kMtq3DAUhkVoaS7tIi9QBN00i0kk2dalu-DmBoFuWsgiII7lo-LEthxJQ5hdHiHP2CeJk5lkUcjqnMXHx89HyD5nh5wxceRceyhUqcstssMrIRZKyKsPm5-bUm6T3ZRuGGNGCvOJbAtTFKLg1Q65rsMwQexSGGnwNEeEPOCYacoRMv7tMFEfIvU4hBj-PTxOYeq7jNDTtksICX_QYzpivg_xlg6YYWZghH6VuvSZfPTQJ_yyuXvkz-nJ7_p8cfnr7KI-vly4cl63MEYpBUJJ0K6shOO8bUshZaO9VlJqkMhBFRoKrX3rROtbAeAb13BdNtwUe-T72jvFcLfElO3QJYd9DyOGZbLcaFNppTib0W__oTdhGee9yQpWFZUspHkWHqwpF0NKEb2dYjdAXFnO7HNyOye3L8ln9uvGuGwGbN_I18YzcLQG7rseV--bbF3_XCufAOsyjOI</recordid><startdate>20180601</startdate><enddate>20180601</enddate><creator>Koifman, Edward</creator><creator>Lipinski, Michael J.</creator><creator>Buchanan, Kyle</creator><creator>Yu Kang, Won</creator><creator>Escarcega, Ricardo O.</creator><creator>Waksman, Ron</creator><creator>Bernardo, Nelson L.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4063-9226</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180601</creationdate><title>Comparison of treatment strategies for femoro‐popliteal disease: A network meta‐analysis</title><author>Koifman, Edward ; Lipinski, Michael J. ; Buchanan, Kyle ; Yu Kang, Won ; Escarcega, Ricardo O. ; Waksman, Ron ; Bernardo, Nelson L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4194-99777a276a8c452c11dd4266b8f87668a6e1a738a388fdc2dfd2aafbcb184b193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Angioplasty</topic><topic>Bayesian analysis</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Diabetes mellitus</topic><topic>Implants</topic><topic>Medical equipment</topic><topic>Medical treatment</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>outcome</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>peripheral artery disease</topic><topic>Randomization</topic><topic>Restenosis</topic><topic>Stents</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>target lesion revascularization</topic><topic>Vascular diseases</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Koifman, Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lipinski, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchanan, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu Kang, Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escarcega, Ricardo O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waksman, Ron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernardo, Nelson L.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Koifman, Edward</au><au>Lipinski, Michael J.</au><au>Buchanan, Kyle</au><au>Yu Kang, Won</au><au>Escarcega, Ricardo O.</au><au>Waksman, Ron</au><au>Bernardo, Nelson L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of treatment strategies for femoro‐popliteal disease: A network meta‐analysis</atitle><jtitle>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</jtitle><addtitle>Catheter Cardiovasc Interv</addtitle><date>2018-06-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>91</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1320</spage><epage>1328</epage><pages>1320-1328</pages><issn>1522-1946</issn><eissn>1522-726X</eissn><abstract>Objectives We sought to compare treatment strategies in a Bayesian network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a prevalent morbidity that is treated with various strategies. Methods We performed a MEDLINE search for randomized studies comparing at least 2 treatment strategies, including bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) balloons, stents, covered stents, drug‐eluting stents (DES), and drug‐coated balloons (DCB), in patients with native femoro‐popliteal disease. Mixed treatment comparison model generation was performed to directly and indirectly compare the strategies in terms of restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) presented as odds ratios (OR, [95% credible intervals]). Results Twenty‐nine studies with 4,820 patients were included in the present study. PTA was the largest group with 1,900 patients, followed by DCB (n = 1,343), bare metal stents (n = 941), covered stents (n = 304), DES (n = 236), and bypass (n = 92). Mean age was 68 ± 9 years, 64% were male, 37% diabetic, and 55% smokers. Mean lesion length was 77 ± 44 mm, and 39% were total occlusions. Bayesian hierarchical random‐effects model demonstrated all treatments were significantly better than, or had a trend toward superiority over, PTA, with DCB ranking well in both restenosis (OR = 0.29, [0.17‐0.47]) and TLR (OR = 0.31, [0.20‐0.46]). Nonetheless, none of the therapies showed superiority in terms of survival or amputations. Conclusion Treatment of femoro‐popliteal disease has significantly evolved in recent years, with higher rates of patency and freedom from TLR. However, the utility of these treatment strategies in terms of reduction of amputations and overall survival remains in question.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>29332315</pmid><doi>10.1002/ccd.27484</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4063-9226</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1522-1946
ispartof Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 2018-06, Vol.91 (7), p.1320-1328
issn 1522-1946
1522-726X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1989587710
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Angioplasty
Bayesian analysis
Clinical trials
Diabetes mellitus
Implants
Medical equipment
Medical treatment
Meta-analysis
Morbidity
outcome
Patients
peripheral artery disease
Randomization
Restenosis
Stents
Surgery
target lesion revascularization
Vascular diseases
title Comparison of treatment strategies for femoro‐popliteal disease: A network meta‐analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T10%3A14%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20treatment%20strategies%20for%20femoro%E2%80%90popliteal%20disease:%20A%20network%20meta%E2%80%90analysis&rft.jtitle=Catheterization%20and%20cardiovascular%20interventions&rft.au=Koifman,%20Edward&rft.date=2018-06-01&rft.volume=91&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1320&rft.epage=1328&rft.pages=1320-1328&rft.issn=1522-1946&rft.eissn=1522-726X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ccd.27484&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2053563699%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2053563699&rft_id=info:pmid/29332315&rfr_iscdi=true