ArticleCVIR endovascular2025
Ultrasound assessment of intimal hyperplasia after plain balloon angioplasty and drug-coated balloon angioplasty of AV access stenosis.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether there is a significant decrease in intimal hyperplasia post percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) of AV access stenosis. Comparing drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty with plain uncoated balloon (PUB) angioplasty by examining B-mode ultrasound measurements of percentage intimal medial thickening (%IMT) in stenotic lesions pre and post PTA.
methodsOne hundred ninety-one consecutive PTA procedures for AV access dysfunction were screened retrospectively for inclusion. Those procedures where there was an ultrasound prior to and following PTA with measurements of IMT were included.
resultsNinety-nine stenotic lesions were included in a total of 87 patients. A total of 26/99, 26%, were treated by DCB angioplasty, and a total of 73/99, 74%, were treated by PUB angioplasty. The difference between the pre-PTA and post-PTA %IMT was calculated and defined as the delta-%IMT for each group. There was a greater reduction in %IMT in the DCB group (mean delta-%IMT = - 22.35%) when compared with the PUB group (mean delta-%IMT = - 5.94%), p = 0.0005. Delta-%IMT for those lesions where there was a baseline pre-PTA %IMT of greater than 25% was examined. The mean delta-%IMT reduced in the PUB group from - 5.94% to - 2.20% and remained similar in the DCB group at - 20.05%, p = 0.0003. A Kaplan-Meir survival analysis examining primary patency over 24 months did not demonstrate any significant difference between the 2 groups.
conclusionThe statistically significant decrease in %IMT post PTA using a DCB compared with PUB angioplasty appears to demonstrate an anti-proliferative drug effect on lesion intimal hyperplasia. However, this did not translate into a sustained difference in target lesion primary patency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.