| Abstract: | PurposeTo compare the efficacy and safety between paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty and conventional balloon (CB) angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous fistula (AVF).MethodsWe 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.ResultsFourteen 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).ConclusionsPCB 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. |
