The efficacy and safety of different endovascular modalities for infrapopliteal arteries lesions: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Endovascular treatment has become the first-line therapy for infrapopliteal artery occlusive disease (IPOD), while the optimal endovascular method remains to be determined. We performed a network meta-analysis (NWM) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to simultaneously compare the outcomes of different endovascular modalities for IPOD. The Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were used as data sources. The NWM approach used random-effects models based on the frequentist framework. In total, 22 eligible RCTs (44 study arms; 1,348 patients) involving nine endovascular modalities or combinations [balloon angioplasty (BA), drug-coated balloon (DCB), drug-eluting stent (DES), atherectomy device + BA (AD + BA), AD + DCB, balloon-expandable bare metal stent (BMS), self-expanding stent (SES), absorbable metal stents (AMS), and inorganics-coated stent (ICS)] were included. BA had a lower 12-month primary patency rate than DCB (RR 0.50, CI 0.27, 0.93) and AD + DCB (RR 0.34, CI 0.12, 0.93). AD + DCB decreased 6-month TLR compared with AMS (RR 0.15, CI 0.03, 0.90), and DES decreased it compared with BMS (RR 0.25, CI 0.09, 0.71). DCB had a lower 6-month TLR rate than AMS (RR 0.26, CI 0.08, 0.86) and BA (RR 0.51, CI 0.30, 0.89). BA had a higher 12-month TLR rate than DCB (RR 1.76, CI 1.07, 2.90). According to the value of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), AD + DCB was considered the best treatment in terms of primary patency at 6 months (SUCRA = 87.5) and 12 months (SURCA = 91). AD + BA was considered the best treatment in terms of 6-month TLR (SUCRA = 83.1), 12-month TLR (SURCA = 75.8), and 12-month all-cause mortality (SUCRA = 92.5). In terms of 12-month major amputation, DES was considered the best treatment (SUCRA = 78.6), while AD + DCB was considered the worst treatment (SUCRA = 28.8). Moreover, AD + BA always ranks higher than AD + DCB in the comparison including these two combinations. Subgroup analyses of modalities without stenting did not significantly change the primary outcomes. ADs showed noteworthy advantages in multiple terms for IPOD except for 12-month major amputation. AD + BA may be a better method for IPOD than AD + DCB. The efficacy and safety of ADs are worthy of further investigation. [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42022331626].