Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data After Kissing Stent Treatment for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Diseases
/ diagnostic imaging
Constriction, Pathologic
Critical Illness
Endovascular Procedures
/ adverse effects
Female
Humans
Iliac Artery
/ diagnostic imaging
Intermittent Claudication
/ diagnostic imaging
Ischemia
/ diagnostic imaging
Male
Middle Aged
Peripheral Arterial Disease
/ diagnostic imaging
Prosthesis Design
Recurrence
Risk Factors
Stents
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Vascular Patency
aortic bifurcation
aortoiliac occlusive disease
individual patient data
kissing stents
meta-analysis
Journal
Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists
ISSN: 1545-1550
Titre abrégé: J Endovasc Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100896915
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2019
02 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
1
12
2018
medline:
6
5
2020
entrez:
1
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate short- and long-term technical and clinical outcomes after kissing stent treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) based on an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. A search of the Scopus database identified 156 articles on KS treatment of AIOD; of these 22 met the inclusion criteria. Authors of 19 articles with contact information were approached to join an IPD consortium. Eight author groups responded and 5 provided anonymized data for merging into an IPD database. The number of included procedures was equal before and after 2005. The primary study outcome was the cumulative patency at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were patency at up to 60 months, complications, and changes in Rutherford category and ankle-brachial index. The predictive value of stent protrusion length, pre-/postdilation, stent type, and patient demographics on primary patency were examined with Cox proportional hazard modeling; outcomes are reported as the hazard ratio (HR). The Kaplan-Meier method was employed to estimate patency rates. In total, 605 (40.9%) of 1480 patients presented in the literature were included in the IPD analysis. The indication for intervention was intermittent claudication in 84.2% and critical limb ischemia in 15.8%. Lesions were classified as TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) A or B in 52.8% and TASC C and D in 47.2%. The overall primary patency estimate was 81% at 24 months. Primary patency significantly increased after 2005 (p=0.005). Cox regression analysis revealed only age as a significant predictor of sustained primary patency (HR 0.60, p<0.005). Any previous endovascular intervention (HR 2.52, p=0.02) was the main predictor for loss of secondary patency; history of cardiovascular disease (HR 0.27, p=0.04) was the main predictor of sustained secondary patency. The kissing stent technique has a good safety profile and acceptable patency rates up to 2 years, even in TASC C and D lesions, supporting an endovascular-first approach for AIOD.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30499352
doi: 10.1177/1526602818810535
pmc: PMC6330696
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
31-40Références
J Vasc Surg. 1999 Sep;30(3):436-44
pubmed: 10477636
Circulation. 1999 Nov 9;100(19 Suppl):II295-300
pubmed: 10567319
J Endovasc Ther. 2002 Jun;9(3):363-8
pubmed: 12096953
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2002 Nov-Dec;25(6):472-5
pubmed: 12357313
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003 Nov;60(3):320-6
pubmed: 14571480
J Endovasc Ther. 2005 Dec;12(6):696-703
pubmed: 16363899
J Vasc Surg. 2006 Jan;43(1):32-9
pubmed: 16414384
J Endovasc Ther. 2006 Jun;13(3):291-301
pubmed: 16784315
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007 Jan-Feb;30(1):42-7
pubmed: 17122886
J Vasc Surg. 2007 Jan;45 Suppl S:S5-67
pubmed: 17223489
Ann Vasc Surg. 2008 May-Jun;22(3):346-57
pubmed: 18411026
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008 Oct;36(4):424-31
pubmed: 18692412
J Vasc Surg. 2008 Dec;48(6):1451-7, 1457.e1-3
pubmed: 18804943
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010 Jul;21(7):995-1003
pubmed: 20538478
Ann Vasc Surg. 2012 May;26(4):521-6
pubmed: 22410142
J Endovasc Ther. 2013 Feb;20(1):64-73
pubmed: 23391085
Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2013 Oct;28(4):327-32
pubmed: 23539356
Ann Vasc Surg. 2015 Apr;29(3):543-50
pubmed: 25595108
Ann Vasc Surg. 2015;29(4):738-50
pubmed: 25733220
JAMA. 2015 Apr 28;313(16):1657-65
pubmed: 25919529
J Vasc Surg. 2015 Jul;62(1):68-74
pubmed: 25953019
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015 Sep;26(9):1277-84
pubmed: 25990132
Acta Chir Belg. 2015 May-Jun;115(3):191-7
pubmed: 26158249
Vasc Specialist Int. 2015 Mar;31(1):15-9
pubmed: 26217639
Stem Cells Int. 2016;2016:4035307
pubmed: 26880959
J Vasc Surg. 2016 Jul;64(1):e1-e21
pubmed: 27345516
J Vasc Surg. 2017 Jan;65(1):99-107
pubmed: 27633164
Ann Vasc Surg. 2017 Jul;42:328-336
pubmed: 28390920
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Aug 28;10(16):1694-1704
pubmed: 28838480
J Vasc Surg. 2018 May;67(5):1438-1447
pubmed: 29169878
J Endovasc Ther. 2018 Oct;25(5):632-639
pubmed: 30122138
Am Heart J. 1998 Oct;136(4 Pt 1):600-5
pubmed: 9778061