# Durability of Exercise vs. Revascularization in Intermittent Claudication: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Focusing on Patient-Centered Outcomes

## TL;DR

Exercise therapy provides long-lasting benefits for patients with intermittent claudication, while revascularization offers quicker relief but requires repeat procedures over time.

## Contribution

An updated meta-analysis comparing the long-term durability of exercise therapy and revascularization for intermittent claudication.

## Key findings

- Exercise therapy and revascularization both improve quality of life and walking distance at 12 months.
- Exercise therapy provides sustained benefits beyond 24 months, while revascularization benefits decline due to restenosis.
- Combining revascularization with exercise therapy yields better outcomes than exercise alone in the short term.

## Abstract

Intermittent claudication (IC) is the most frequent symptomatic manifestation of lower-extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD). Supervised exercise therapy (SET) and endovascular revascularization (ER) are established treatments, but their relative and combined effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) remain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SET, ER, and ER+SET, with HRQoL as the primary outcome. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020, PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were used in December 2024. Eligible RCTs enrolled with IC (excluding critical limb-threatening ischemia) and reported validated HRQoL outcomes at ≥3 months. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) for HRQoL and mean differences (MDs) for walking distance. Results: Five RCTs (n = 728) were included. Compared with optimal medical therapy, both SET and ER improved HRQoL and walking distance. At 12 months, no significant effect was observed between SET and ER (SMD 0.02; 95% CI: −0.18 to 0.22). ER+SET was superior to SET alone (SMD 0.35; 95% CI: 0.12–0.57). Beyond 24 months, improvements were sustained with SET but attenuated with ER, accompanied by higher reintervention rates in ER-containing arms (approximately 20–30% by 2 years). Adverse events were rare (<1%). Conclusions: Given moderate-certainty evidence (GRADE), SET should remain the first-line therapy for intermittent claudication because it provides durable improvements in patient-centered outcomes with minimal harm. Endovascular revascularization (ER) can provide faster symptom relief, but its long-term benefits are constrained by restenosis and repeat procedures, particularly in femoropopliteal disease.