1. Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Intervention and Endarterectomy in Patients with Femoral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Author
-
Nidhruv Ravikumar, Gopika Sreejith, Sharon Hiu Ching Law, Prakhar Anand, Noah Varghese, Samrin Kagdi, Navneet Kang, Mohamed Nashnoush, Sihat Salam, and Ibsen Ongidi
- Subjects
endovascular ,endarterectomy ,femoral artery ,atherosclerosis ,minimally invasive ,peripheral arterial disease ,Diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs ,RC633-647.5 - Abstract
Peripheral artery disease is a prevalent illness affecting more than 200 million people worldwide. A commonly used technique to manage the condition has been open endarterectomy. However, in recent times, a shift towards minimally invasive techniques has resulted in endovascular intervention as a popular alternative. This review aims to assess the safety and efficacy of endovascular intervention when compared with endarterectomy. A systematic review of the articles published in PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and Scopus within the last 10 years was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to, and the Newcastle-Ottawa and NICE quality assessment scales were used. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using the RStudio software (RStudio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, PBC, Boston, MA, USA). Twenty-six studies were included, with a total of 7126 patients (endovascular, 2496; endarterectomy, 4630). Technical success was greater for endarterectomy than endovascular intervention with an odds ratio of 0.38; 95% CI [0.27–0.54]. In terms of safety as well endovascular intervention was better than endarterectomy with an odds ratio of 0.22; 95% CI [0.15 to 0.31] for wound infection. Endovascular intervention is a safe and effective procedure; however, it cannot be considered superior to endarterectomy.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF