Comparison of long-term patency after endovascular therapy for superficial femoral artery occlusive disease between patients with and without hemodialysis

Long-term clinical outcomes after self-expandable bare nitinol stent implantation for femoropopliteal occlusive disease in hemodialysis patients

OBJECTIVES

To compare the long-term clinical outcomes after self-expandable bare nitinol stent (BNS) implantation between hemodialysis (HD) and non-HD patients with femoropopliteal (FP) disease.

BACKGROUND

Although a BNS has been commonly used in patients with FP disease, the long-term efficacy of BNSs in HD patients remains unknown.

METHODS

In total, 427 HD patients treated with a BNS for FP disease were enrolled, along with 157 non-HD patients as a control group. Over the following 5 years, the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR), major amputation and mortality was investigated. We also performed propensity-score matching analysis.

RESULTS

The 5-year TLR rate (45.2 vs. 32.5%, p = .013) and mortality rate (39.3 vs. 14.0%, p = .0002) were significantly higher in the HD group than in the non-HD group. The major amputation rate was comparable between the groups (7.2% in the HD group vs. 2.8% in the non-HD group, p = .16). In the propensity-score-matched cohort, the TLR rate, and mortality rate were remained higher in the HD group than in the non-HD group (48.9 vs. 34.1%, hazard ratio [HR] 2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-3.49, p = .0024, and 47.9 vs. 12.0%, HR 3.38, 95% CI 1.86-6.56, p < .0001, respectively). The adjusted amputation rate was consistently similar between the groups (1.7% in the HD group vs. 2.7% in the non-HD group, HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.26-2.99, p = .86).

CONCLUSIONS

The TLR rate and mortality at 5 years post BNS implantation for FP disease were significantly higher in HD patients than in non-HD patients, though the limb salvage rate was similar.

Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Conventional Balloon Angioplasty in Dialysis Patients With Symptomatic Femoropopliteal Disease - A Matched Comparison

BACKGROUND

Recent randomized trials have shown the treatment benefits of use of a drug-coated balloon (DCB) over conventional percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) in patients with femoropopliteal disease. However, the effectiveness and safety of DCB for dialysis patients remain unclear.Methods and Results:Consecutive dialysis patients, who underwent PTA or DCB for femoropopliteal disease, were assessed retrospectively via 2:1 propensity score matching. Effectiveness and safety endpoints, including binary restenosis, clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), amputations, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and deaths, were compared between groups. A total of 278 dialysis patients with 339 limbs were eligible for matching: 84 limbs from 77 patients treated with PTA and 46 limbs from 37 patients treated with DCB were compared after matching. Baseline patient and lesion characteristics were not different between groups. Patients treated with DCB had significantly higher rates of freedom from binary restenosis (52.4% vs. 18.6%, P<0.001) and CD-TLR (56.4% vs. 25.9%, P=0.001) at 2 years compared with patients treated with PTA. Both groups had similar outcomes for amputation, MACE, and death. Cox proportional analysis showed that treatment with DCB was independently associated with a reduction of binary restenosis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.368, P=0.001) and CD-TLR (HR 0.390, P=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested superior 2-year outcomes using DCB compared with PTA and similar safety profiles in dialysis patients with femoropopliteal disease.

Impact of Chronic Renal Failure on Safety and Effectiveness of Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Femoropopliteal Artery Disease: Subgroup Analysis from Zilver PTX Post-Market Surveillance Study in Japan

Purpose

Favorable long-term outcomes of the Zilver PTX drug-eluting stent (DES) in femoropopliteal lesions have been demonstrated. Chronic renal failure (CRF) has been shown to be a risk factor for restenosis and decreased limb salvage. The results of the DES in patients with CRF have not previously been reported. This study compares the results with the DES in patients with CRF and those without CRF.

Methods

This retrospective analysis from the Zilver PTX Japan Post-Market Surveillance Study included 321 patients with CRF and 584 patients without CRF. Outcomes included freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) and patency.

Results

Of the patients included in this subgroup analysis, 2-year data were available for 209 patients in the CRF group and 453 patients in the non-CRF group. The two groups were similar in terms of lesion length and the frequency of in-stent restenosis. Critical limb ischemia, severe calcification, and diabetes were more common in patients with CRF, whereas total occlusion was more common in patients without CRF. Freedom from TLR rates were 81.4 versus 84.9% (p = 0.24), and patency rates were 70.7 versus 70.3% (p = 0.95) in patients with and without CRF at 2 years, respectively.

Conclusion

This is the first comparative study of the DES in femoropopliteal artery lesions in patients with and without CRF. These results indicate that the DES placed in femoropopliteal artery lesions of CRF patients is safe and effective with similar patency and TLR rates to patients without CRF.

Level of Evidence

Level 3, Post-Market Surveillance Study.

Current Perspective on Hemodialysis Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease

The prevalence of peripheral artery disease is substantially higher in patients on chronic hemodialysis than in the general population. The presence of calcified lesions characteristic of hemodialysis patients has an adverse influence on the initial success and long-term outcomes of both surgical bypass and endovascular therapy. Although the selection of revascularization strategy depends on whether an autologous vein is available and if the patient has a life expectancy of at least two years, it is difficult to predict the life expectancy in a real-world clinical situation. Endovascular therapy may be appropriate for many hemodialysis patients with poor general condition because of the high risk of perioperative complications and the poor long-term prognosis. Deciding which treatment option is more appropriate should be done on a case-by-case basis, especially in hemodialysis patients with critical limb ischemia.