SynthesisCardiovascular and interventional radiology2026
Comparison of Drug-Coated Balloon versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Arteriovenous Fistula Stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDrug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty is a promising therapy for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) stenosis in hemodialysis patients. However, comparative evidence on the long-term efficacy of DCB versus plain balloon angioplasty (PBA), the sources of heterogeneity, and its differential effects on various access types remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis synthesizes randomized controlled trial (RCT) data to evaluate clinical outcomes of these approaches. MATERIALS: This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated DCB versus PBA for AVF stenosis (PROSPERO CRD420250651907). We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to February 17, 2025, for RCTs reporting 6-month target lesion primary patency.
resultsTwenty-one RCTs (n = 2,537 patients) were included. DCB significantly improved primary patency at 6 months (OR 2.43, 95% CI: 1.81-3.27; P = 0.002) and 12 months (OR 1.88, 95% CI: 1.54-2.30; P = 0.230), but the benefit attenuated at 24 months (OR 1.36, 95% CI: 1.00-1.85; P = 0.794). Complication and mortality rates were comparable between groups at all timepoints.
conclusionsDCB angioplasty provides superior short-to-medium-term primary patency versus PBA for AVF stenosis, although this benefit diminishes with prolonged follow-up. The two modalities show comparable safety. The higher initial cost of DCB necessitates individualized treatment decisions based on patient life expectancy and lesion characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41320683What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.