OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the best endovascular treatment for de novo femoropopliteal lesions at long-term follow-up through network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
METHODS: Medical databases were searched on September 17, 2023. 17 trials and 7 treatments were selected. Outcomes were primary patency, target lesion revascularization (TLR), major amputation and all-cause mortality at 3 and/or 5 years.
RESULTS: Regarding 3-year primary patency, drug-eluting stents (DES) was the best and better than balloon angioplasty (BA; odds ratio [OR], 4.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.68-9.18), bare metal stents (BMS; OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.45-5.46), cryoplasty (OR, 6.75; 95% CI, 2.76-16.50), covered stents (CS; OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.19-8.87) and drug-coated balloons (DCB; OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.63). Regarding 5-year primary patency, DES was the best and better than BMS (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.10-4.99). Regarding 3-year TLR, DES was the best and better than BA (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.13-0.44). Regarding 5-year TLR, DES was the best and better than BA (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.09-0.42) and balloon angioplasty with brachytherapy (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.74). Regarding 3- and 5-year major amputation, DCB was the best. Regarding 3-year mortality, DES was the best and better than CS (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.67).
CONCLUSIONS: DES was the best treatment regarding 3-year primary patency, TLR and mortality, and DCB was the best regarding major amputation. DES was the best treatment regarding 5-year TLR, and DCB was the best regarding primary patency and major amputation. DES and DCB should be given priority in treating femoropopliteal lesions.

In an aging population with a rising incidence of peripheral artery disease, endovascular therapy is a favorable alternative to open surgical bypass. As a minimally invasive approach, endovascular therapy incurs less physiologic stress and periprocedural complications. Balloon angioplasty and stenting have been the predominant tools in peripheral endovascular therapy. The mechanisms of endovascular therapy have evolved beyond pneumatic dilation and forcing plaque against vessel wall with angioplasty and stenting. Technology has broadened to adjunctive local treatments with pharmaceutical agents coating balloons or eluting from stents, atherectomy to remove intimal and medial plaque, and more recently, intravascular lithotripsy to fracture and modify plaque. These technologies have performed well in curated clinical trials and in the real world for short-segment disease. Despite the excellent outcomes of treatment for short-segment occlusive disease, post-procedural patency of endovascular treatment for long-segment, highly calcified lesions remains challenging in the femoropopliteal region. The development of drug-coated balloons and stents brings the hope of improved patency. However, the results are incrementally better at best and are not superior to surgical bypass. In addition, there is controversy regarding the long-term mortality risk. With numerous devices and techniques as well as differing magnitudes of peripheral artery disease, it will be difficult to practically have a study to answer all questions regarding endovascular treatment of the femoropopliteal artery. This review examines current endovascular techniques for de novo and recurrent femoropopliteal arterial occlusive disease, as well as the applicability of intravascular ultrasound and optimal stenting strategies for long-segment disease.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the most effective endovascular treatment modalities for de novo femoropopliteal lesions in intermittent claudication (IC) in terms of technical success, primary patency, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and all-cause mortality through network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
METHODS: Medical databases were searched on December 3, 2020. 16 studies (3265 patients) and 7 treatments were selected. Outcomes were technical success, primary patency, TLR and mortality at 6 and/or 12 months.
RESULTS: Regarding 6-month primary patency, drug-eluting stents (DES) was better than balloon angioplasty (BA; odds ratio [OR], 23.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.57-43.06), drug-coated balloons (DCB; OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 2.26-14.03) and directional atherectomy (DA; OR, 31.52; 95% CI, 7.81-127.28), and bare nitinol stents (BNS) was better than BA (OR, 17.91; 95% CI, 7.22-44.48), DCB (OR, 4.33; 95% CI, 1.40-13.45) and DA (OR, 24.27; 95% CI, 5.16-114.11). Regarding 12-month primary patency, DES was better than BA (OR, 10.05; 95% CI, 4.56-22.16), DCB (OR, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.54-8.89) and DA (OR, 29.54; 95% CI, 7.26-120.26). DCB and combination of balloon and atherectomy were the most effective treatment regarding 12-month TLR and technical success (residual stenosis <30%), respectively. DES, BNS and DA with DCB (DA-DCB) were included in the best cluster in the clustered ranking plot combining 12-month primary patency and TLR.
CONCLUSIONS: Balloon and atherectomy may confer advantages over other treatments for technical success; DCB may for TLR. Stent technologies confer substantial advantages regarding primary patency. Stent technologies and DA-DCB should be given priority in treating femoropopliteal lesions in IC.

To compare the efficacy and safety between drug-coated devices (DCDs) and bypass surgery with saphenous vein graft (BSV) in femoropopliteal arterial occlusive disease.
A Bayesian network meta-analysis and indirect comparison were performed. Randomized controlled trials of BSV, bypass surgery with prosthetic graft, bare metal stents, endoluminal bypass (covered stent), percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, and DCDs treating femoropopliteal arterial occlusive disease were collected. The primary end point was target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization, and secondary end points were all-cause mortality, limb salvage, and early complications (PROSPERO registry number: CRD42019136530).
Forty-two trials and 6867 patients were included. The comparison of DCDs and BSV revealed no significant difference in the 1-year target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization (DCDs vs BSV: odds ratio [OR], 0.60; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.16-2.39). Total early complications from BSV were significantly higher than those from DCDs (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 0.14; 95% CrI, 0.05-0.45), and the main complications of BSV were not death related. There was also no significant difference in systemic early complications (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 0.19; 95% CrI, 0.00-7.82) and 1-year amputation rate (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 2.81; 95% CrI, 0.16-89.53). The 30-day (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 0.38; 95% CrI, 0.00-110.46), 1-year (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 0.96; 95% CrI, 0.24-3.29), 2-year (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 1.60; 95% CrI, 0.64-4.95), and 5-year all-cause mortality rates (DCDs vs BSV: OR, 2.05; 95% CrI, 0.92-4.39) showed no significant differences between DCDs and BSV, although there was a noticeable tendency toward significant results of a higher 5-year mortality rate.
There is no significant difference between DCDs and BSV in short-term efficacy or short- and long-term mortality. Despite traditional BSV remaining the gold standard, DCDs provide a reasonable alternative therapy. In addition, the DCDs have a lower short-term morbidity associated with the procedure at the cost of the possible risk of higher long-term mortality. Clinical trials with more validity are required for a direct comparison between BSV and DCDs.

This quantitative meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting balloon (DEB) vs. uncoated balloon (UCB) in patients with femoropopliteal arterial occlusive disease.
Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DEB and UCB till November 2018. The random-effects model was used for conducting pooled analyses.
Seventeen RCTs with 2706 patients were included in the final meta-analysis. Patients who received DEB had higher levels of minimal luminal diameter (MLD) at 6 (WMD: 0.77; 95%CI: 0.53 to 1.02; P < 0.001) and 12 months (WMD: 1.33; 95%CI: 0.93 to 1.73; P < 0.001) than those who received UCB. DEB reduced the late lumen loss (LLL) levels after 6 (WMD: -0.57; 95%CI: - 1.07 to - 0.06; P = 0.029) and 12 months (WMD: -0.95; 95%CI: - 1.28 to - 0.62; P < 0.001). DEB was found not superior over UCB on primary patency after 6 months (RR: 1.44; 95%CI: 0.88-2.35; P = 0.149), whereas DEB increased the primary patency after 12 (RR: 1.51; 95%CI: 1.25-1.83; P < 0.001) and 24 months (RR: 1.51; 95%CI: 1.30-1.77; P < 0.001). Patients who received DEB had reduced the risk of restenosis after 6 (RR: 0.47; 95%CI: 0.33-0.67; P < 0.001) and 12 months (RR: 0.55; 95%CI: 0.35-0.85; P = 0.008). DEB reduced the risk of major adverse events after 6 (RR: 0.30; 95%CI: 0.14-0.61; P = 0.001), 12 (RR: 0.49; 95%CI: 0.32-0.76; P = 0.001) and 24 months (RR: 0.62; 95%CI: 0.41-0.92; P = 0.018).
DEB yielded additional benefits on MLD, LLL, primary patency, restenosis, TLR, and major adverse events than UCB in patients with femoropopliteal arterial occlusive disease.