The Efficacy of Paclitaxel Drug-Eluting Balloon Angioplasty Versus Standard Balloon Angioplasty in Stenosis of Native Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistulas: An Analysis of Clinical Success, Primary Patency and Risk Factors for Recurrent Dysfunction
To investigate the efficacy of paclitaxel drug-eluting balloons (PEB) versus standard balloon angioplasty (BA) in stenosis of native hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs).
Materials and Methods
A total of 96 patients with ESRD (mean ± SD age 57.0 ± 9.1 years, 63.5% were males) who underwent endovascular treatment with PEB angioplasty (n = 32) and BA (n = 64) for a dysfunctional native AVF were included. Clinical success, complications, primary patency and postoperative recurrence parameters were recorded in each group.
Primary patency rate at 6 months was significantly higher in PEB than in BA group (96.9 vs. 20.3%, p < 0.001), while the two groups had similar primary patency rates at 9 months (66.8 vs. 50.0%) and 12 months (6.3% for each). No significant difference was noted between PEB and BA groups in terms of the rate (21.9% and. 31.3%), time (median 220 vs. 152.5 days) and reasons (reocclusion in 18.8 vs. 28.1%) for dysfunction recurrence as well as the number of recurrent treatments. AVF dysfunction recurrence was more likely in younger age AVF (median 4 vs. 23 months, p < 0.001 in PEB, and 8.5 vs. 20.5 months p = 0.001 in SBA) and in AVF ≤ 6 months in both SBA and PEB groups (71.4 vs. 12.0%, p = 0.005 in PEB, 40.0 vs. 2.3%, p < 0.001).
In conclusion, our findings emphasize favorable safety and efficacy of PEB and BA in the management of dysfunctional hemodialysis AVFs with similar rates of post-PTA recurrence of AVF dysfunction. Nonetheless, there was a nonsignificant tendency for lower rate and a delay for recurrent dysfunction in patients treated with PEB and a significant association younger AVF age with an increased risk of post-PTA recurrence of AVF dysfunction.
Level of Evidence
3, Retrospective cohort study.
KeywordsPaclitaxel drug-eluting balloon angioplasty Standard balloon angioplasty Hemodialysis Arteriovenous fistula Clinical success Primary patency Recurrent dysfunction
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Consent for Publication
While the present study was exempt from the requirement of ethical approval in relation to its retrospective design, the permission was obtained from our institutional ethics committee for the use of patient data for publication purposes.
- 2.Tham WP, Burgmans MC, Tan BS, et al. Percutaneous endovascular treatment to salvage non-maturing arteriovenous fistulas in a multiethnic asian population. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2017;46:64–71.Google Scholar
- 13.Tepe G, Laird J, Schneider P, et al. IN.PACT SFA trial investigators. Drug-coated balloon versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for the treatment of superficial femoral and popliteal peripheral artery disease: 12-Month results fromthe IN.PACT SFA randomized trial. Circulation. 2015;131:495–502.Google Scholar
- 17.Katsanos K, Karnabatidis D, Kitrou P, Spiliopoulos S, Christeas N, Siablis D. Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty vs. plain balloon dilation for the treatment of failing dialysis access: 6-Month interim results from a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Endovasc Ther. 2012;19:263–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Kitrou PM, Katsanos K, Spiliopoulos S, Karnabatidis D, Siablis D. Drug-eluting versus plain balloon angioplasty for the treatment of failing dialysis access: final results andcost-effectiveness analysis from a prospective randomized controlled trial (NCT01174472). Eur J Radiol. 2015;84:418–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Bountouris I, Kritikou G, Degermetzoglou N, Avgerinos KI. A review of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in hemodialysis fistula. Int J Vasc Med. 2018;2018:1420136. Review.Google Scholar
- 25.Aruny JE, Lewis CA, Cardella JF, et al. Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous management of the thrombosed or dysfunctional dialysis access: standards of practice committee of the society of cardiovascular & interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1999;10:491–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Bountouris I, Kristmundsson T, Dias N, Zdanowski Z, Malina M. Is repeat PTA of a failing hemodialysis fistula durable? Int J Vasc Med. 2014;2014:369687.Google Scholar
- 41.Swinnen JJ, Hitos K, Kairaitis L, et al. Multicentre, randomised, blinded, control trial of drug-eluting balloon vs Sham in recurrent native dialysis fistula stenoses. J Vasc Access. 2018:1129729818801556. https://doi.org/10.1177/1129729818801556. [Epub ahead of print].
- 42.Björkman P, Weselius EM, Kokkonen T, Rauta V, Albäck A, Venermo M. Drug-coated versus plain balloon angioplasty in arteriovenous fistulas: a randomized, controlled study with 1-year follow-up (The drecorest Ii-study). Scand J Surg. 2018:1457496918798206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1457496918798206. [Epub ahead of print].
- 43.Roosen LJ, Karamermer Y, Vos JA, de Jong GM, Bos WJ, Elgersma OE. Paclitaxel-coated balloons do not prevent recurrent stenosis in hemodialysis access fistulae: results of a randomized clinical trial. Italian J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;24:35–40.Google Scholar