Skip to main content
. 2015 Aug 19;18(3):240–246. doi: 10.1111/jch.12650

Table 3.

Major Interventional Studies for ARAS and FMD

Study Year Patients Type Follow‐Up Objective Results
ARAS studies
Dorros et al28 1998 163 Prospective 4 years To evaluate PTA/stenting in ARAS Benefit
van Jaarsveld et al34 2000 106 RCT 1 year To compare PTA vs medical treatment in ARAS No benefit
Dorros et al29 2002 1058 Prospective 4 years To evaluate PTA/stenting in ARAS Benefit
Zeller et al30 2003 241 Prospective 5 years To evaluate PTA/stenting in ARAS Benefit
Zeller et al31 2004 340 Prospective 6 years To evaluate PTA/stenting in ARAS Benefit
Wheatley et al32 2009 806 RCT 5 years To compare medical treatment vs medical treatment plus PTA/stenting in ARAS No benefit
Bax et al33 2009 140 RCT 2 years To evaluate PTA/stenting in ARAS No benefit
FMD studies
Mousa et al35 2012 35 Retrospective 1 year To evaluate PTA/stenting in renal FMD Benefit
Gavalas et al36 2014 29 Prospective 2–5 years To evaluate PTA in renal FMD Benefit
Fujihara et al37 2014 22 Retrospective 6 years To evaluate PTA in renal FMD Benefit

Abbreviations: ARAS, atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis; FMD, fibromuscular dysplasia; PTA, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty; RCT, randomized controlled trial.