Percutaneous Revascularization for Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis: a Meta-analysis

Objective: This study aimed to investigate whether percutaneous revascularization (PR) was as effective and safe as medication therapy alone in patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS). Methods: : We searched Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library databases from their inception to July 31, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting PR for ARAS. RevMan 5.3 was employed to conduct the analysis. Results: : Of 469 screened studies, 9 were included in our study. A total of 2433 patients with ARAS were recorded. The results demonstrated that PR and medication had a similar antihypertensive effect on both systolic [mean difference (MD)= 0.37, 95% CI: -1.37 to 2.11, p= 0.68] and diastolic blood pressure (MD= -0.75, 95% CI: -2.84 to 1.34, p= 0.48). Meanwhile, there were no differences in all-cause mortality [risk ratio (RR) = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.74-1.10, p=0.31)], stroke (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.53-1.98, p=0.32), congestive heart failure (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.14, p= 0.36), and periprocedural complications (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.72-1.10, p=0.28). Conclusions: : The results revealed that PR was as effective and safe as medication therapy alone in patients with ARAS.