No abstract

Background Drug‐coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has emerged as a mainstay of therapy for the treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) involving the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. We performed a meta‐analysis including all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to date which compare DCB to plain balloon angioplasty (POBA) in femoropopliteal disease (FPD). Methods Five databases were analyzed including EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web‐of‐Science from January 2000 to September 2018 for RCTs comparing DCB to POBA in patients with FPD. Heterogeneity was determined using Cochrane's Q‐statistics. Random effects model was used. Results Twenty‐two RCTs, including five trials of in‐stent restenosis (ISR) intervention, with 3,217 patients were included in the analysis. Mean follow‐up was approximately 21.6 ± 14.4 months. Overall, DCB use was associated with a 51% reduction in target vessel revascularization (TLR) when compared to POBA at follow‐up (relative risk [RR]: 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40–0.61, P < 0.0001). Rates of TLR were 45% lower in the DCB group when compared to POBA in patients with ISR (RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37–0.81, P = 0.002). DCB was associated with lower rates of binary stenosis, late lumen loss and higher primary safety endpoints. Major amputation and mortality were not different between DCB and POBA. Conclusions Use of DCBs is associated with improved vessel patency and a lower risk of TLR when compared to POBA in patients with FPD, especially in the setting of ISR. There was no difference in mortality between DCB and POBA in our meta‐analysis. Extended follow‐up of the available RCT data will be essential to analyze long‐term device‐related mortality.

No abstract

Objectives: We sought to compare outcomes between intravascular ultrasound– (IVUS) versus angiography (AO)-guided peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs). Introduction: Intravascular ultrasound facilitates plaque visualization and angioplasty during PVIs for peripheral arterial disease. It is unclear whether IVUS may improve the durability of PVIs and lead to improved clinical outcomes. Methods: This is a study-level meta-analysis of observational studies. The primary end points of this study were rates of primary patency and reintervention. Secondary end points included rates of vascular complications, periprocedural adverse events, amputations, technical success, all-cause mortality, and myocardial infarction. Results: Eight observational studies were included in this analysis with 93 551 patients. Mean follow-up was 24.2 ± 15 months. Intravascular ultrasound–guided PVIs had similar patency rates when compared with AO-guided PVIs (relative risk [RR]: 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99-1.71, P = .062). There was no difference in rates of reintervention in IVUS-guided PVIs when compared to non-IVUS-guided PVIs (RR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.15-1.13, P = .085). There is a lower risk of periprocedural adverse events (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70-0.94, P = .006) and vascular complications (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.68-0.96, P = .013) in the IVUS group. All-cause mortality (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.56-1.04, P = .084), amputation rates (RR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.32-2.15, P = .705), myocardial infarctions (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.58-2.41, P = .637), and technical success (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86-1.19, P = .886) were similar between the groups. Conclusions: Intravascular ultrasound–guided PVIs had similar primary patency and reintervention when compared with AO-guided PVIs with significantly lower rates of periprocedural adverse events and vascular complications in the IVUS-guided group.

Context Asthma is a leading cause of pediatric chronic illness, and poor disease control can lead to decreased quality of life and impaired academic performance. Although osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) has been shown to have positive effects on pulmonary function in adult patient populations, less is known about its impact in children. Objectives To evaluate changes in pulmonary function testing (PFT) in pediatric patients on the same day they received OMT compared with PFT in those who received usual care. Methods We recruited patients between the ages of 7–18 years with a diagnosis of asthma who were receiving routine care at a primary care asthma clinic and had undergone baseline spirometry. Patients were excluded if they met any of the following criteria: clinical indication for pre- and postbronchodilator spirometry on the day of their visit, albuterol use in the last 8 hours, oral steroid use in the previous 2 weeks, or diagnosis of asthma exacerbation in the previous 4 weeks. Eligible patients were then randomized to either an OMT or a control group. Patients in the OMT group were treated with rib raising and suboccipital release in addition to standard asthma care, while control group patients received standard care only. A second PFT was performed for patients in both groups at the end of the visit. OMT was performed by multiple osteopathic pediatric residents specifically trained for this study. Change in spirometry results (forced vital capacity [FVC], forced expiration volume in 1 second [FEV1], FVC/FEV1, and forced expiratory flow 25–75%) were then compared. Results The study population included 58 patients: 31 (53.4%) were assigned to the OMT group and 27 (46.6%) were assigned to the standard of care group. Patients who received OMT had greater improvement in all spirometry values compared to the usual group; however, these changes were not statistically significant. Conclusions The benefits of OMT on short term spirometry results in pediatric asthma patients remain unclear.