The Influence of Lesion Length on the Efficacy of Angioplasty with Atherectomy in Treating Infrapopliteal Artery Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: For the treatment of infrapopliteal artery disease (IPAD), endovascular intervention is a main choice, including atherectomy (ATH) and balloon angioplasty. However, the comparative efficacy between both approaches was heterogeneous in prior studies. Lesion length is a critical factor in IPAD anatomy classification. There is no meta-analysis to study the influence of lesion length on the effects of atherectomy for IPAD treatment. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy of angioplasty with ATH in different ranges of lesion length compared to angioplasty without ATH. Methods: Studies comparing ATH and angioplasty without ATH, which published up to April 2024 were retrieved from Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Endpoints included limb prognosis and vessel complications. Referring to Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus, 10 cm lesion length was defined as a cutoff value for subgroup analysis. Pooled data were calculated using the Revman 5.4 and Stata 15, presented as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was calculated using I 2 value. Methodological quality was assessed by Cochrane tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The robustness of findings would be evaluated by sensitivity analysis. Egger’s test was performed to detect publication bias. Results: Eleven studies (8412 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Significant higher technical success was detected in ATH group (OR=1.99, 95% CI 1.44–2.76, I 2 =0%). In a subgroup of mean lesion length <10cm, ATH was associated with lower incidence of dissection (OR=0.19, 95% CI 0.05–0.67, I 2 =15%, p=0.01) and bailout stenting (OR=0.18, 95% CI 0.05–0.71, I 2 =16%, p=0.01). No significant differences were found between ATH and no ATH cohorts in primary patency (OR=1.65, 95% CI 0.85–3.19), all-cause death (OR=0.75, 95% CI 0.5–1.13), limb salvage (OR=1.03, 95% CI 0.75–1.41), target-lesion revascularization (OR=0.77, 95% CI 0.47–1.27), and embolization (OR=1.19, 95% CI 0.5–2.83). Conclusion: For IPAD, lesion length is a notable factor affecting the efficacy of ATH. In comparisons with angioplasty without ATH, the use of ATH is contributable in achieving higher technical success. The superiority of ATH may appear in reducing dissection and bailout stenting in treating IPAD with length <10cm. Nevertheless, regardless of lesion length, there seems that ATH cannot effectively improve limb salvage compared to angioplasty alone. Clinical Impact Prior results of several meta-analyses comparing angioplasty with atherectomy to angioplasty alone were inconsistent in prognosis of infrapopliteal artery disease (IPAD), due to high heterogeneity. Considering the lesion length plays a critical role in IPAD anatomy classification, we performed an updated meta-analysis and subgroup analysis based on average lesion length to furtherly evaluate the efficacy of angioplasty following atherectomy. Our study revealed atherectomy showed advantages in obtaining technical success for IPAD ≥ 10cm and reducing the risks of bailout stenting and dissection for IPAD < 10cm. Atherectomy may prevent target-vessel complications rather than improving late patency and limb salvage effectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".