Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty Vs. Pulmonary Endarterectomy in Patients with Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension: A systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Although balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) and pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) are effective in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), the comparison of their efficacy and safety is still unclear. We identified studies through a systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase and used a random effects meta-analysis model to synthesize estimates of weighted mean differences or combined effect size. In total, 54 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The survival rates at perioperative/in-hospital period, 2 years, and 3 years were 100%, 99%, and 97%, respectively, in BPA group and 93%, 90%, and 88%, respectively, in PEA group. The variation of 6-min walk distance was 141.80 m in BPA and 100.73 m in PEA when the follow-up was 1-6 months. At < 1-month, 1-6-month, and > 12-month follow-up, the changed results of mean pulmonary arterial pressure were - 18.31, - 17.00, and - 12.97 mmHg in BPA group and - 18.93, - 21.21, and - 21.35 mmHg in PEA group. At < 1-month and 1-6-month follow-up, the changed values of pulmonary vascular resistance were - 542.24 and - 599.77 dyne•s•cm in PEA group and - 443.49 and - 280.00 dyne•s•cm in BPA group. In addition, there was more wide variety of complications in PEA group than in BPA group. BPA might have higher survival rate (perioperative/in-hospital period, 2-year and 3-year follow-up) and fewer types of complications compared with PEA. The improvement in exercise capacity (1-6-month follow-up) in the BPA group might be more pronounced than in PEA group. Moreover, PEA might be superior in improvement of hemodynamic parameters (< 1-month, 1-6-month, and > 12-month follow-up).