CIRSE Standards of Practice on Below-the-Knee Revascularisation

ESR Essentials: arterial vascular access and closure devices-practice recommendations by the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe

Vascular access is the initial, very important, step of endovascular procedures. Various access sites include the common femoral artery, brachial artery, radial artery, popliteal artery, and distal tibial vessels (pedal arteries). Successful arterial access requires advanced knowledge of anatomy, as well as proper training and experience. Today, vascular access should be obtained using real-time, ultrasound guidance to reduce access time, patient discomfort, and puncture-related complications including dissection, arteriovenous communication, and bleeding. Nevertheless, high-level evidence to support this recommendation in peripheral procedures is limited and level A data are mainly derived from randomized cardiac trials investigating only radial and femoral access. Vascular closure devices (VCDs) for femoral access can be broadly categorized as active closure devices, compression assist devices, and external/topical hemostasis devices. There is high-level evidence demonstrating that their use is related to less time for ambulation and increased patient satisfaction. However, available data failed to clearly demonstrate a benefit in complications compared to standard manual compression in peripheral endovascular arterial procedures, and thrombotic and infectious complications reported following VCD use remain an issue. Heterogeneity noted in the literature, caused by the vast variety of devices, access sites, sheath sizes, clinical scenarios, and procedures, poses difficulties in data analysis and future study design. As a result, an individualized VCD use is currently suggested for ≥ 5 Fr femoral artery access not only to reduce time to hemostasis and ambulation and to improve patient comfort, but also to reduce bleeding complications in cases of femoral access with increased bleeding risk, deranged coagulation, and large-bore access, though a high level of evidence to support this later recommendation is limited. KEY POINTS: US guidance is strongly recommended for femoral access and is mandatory to obtain more challenging access. The use of VCDs for femoral hemostasis is generally safe, effective, and currently supported by level I evidence. Proper training and correct VCD choice, based on the patient's individual characteristics, are imperative to optimize outcomes.

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting has been used effectively to treat internal carotid artery stenosis since 1989 (Mathias et al. in World J Surg. 25(3):328-34, 2001), with refined and expanded techniques and tools presently delivering outstanding results in percutaneous endoluminal treatment of carotid artery stenosis.

PURPOSE

This CIRSE Standards of Practice document is directed at interventional radiologists and details the guidelines for carotid artery stenting, as well as the different implementation techniques. In addition to updating all previously published material on the different clinical indications, it will provide all technical details reflective of European practice for carotid artery stenting. CIRSE Standards of Practice documents do not aim to implement a standard of clinical patient care, but rather to provide a realistic strategy and best practices for the execution of this procedure.

METHODS

The writing group, which was established by the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee, consisted of five clinicians with internationally recognised expertise in carotid artery stenting procedures. The writing group reviewed existing literature on carotid artery stenting procedures, performing a pragmatic evidence search using PubMed to select relevant publications in the English language from 2006 to 2022.

RESULTS

Carotid artery stenting has an established role in the management of internal carotid artery stenosis; this Standards of Practice document provides up-to-date recommendations for its safe performance.

Ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve block for femoral arterial access gain and closure: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of the femoral branch block of the genitofemoral nerve (FBB) versus local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) for femoral arterial access gain and closure.

METHODS

Eighty-two patients (age, 64.8 ± 10.9 years; female, 30.5%) undergoing endovascular procedures using 5-Fr femoral sheath were assigned to either FBB (n = 41) or LIA (n = 41). In both groups, 2% lidocaine HCL with 1:100,000 epinephrine was used as an anesthetic solution. Pain scores during access gain and closure were evaluated using a visual analog scale (score 0-10), patient satisfaction levels with the quality of anesthesia were scored on a 7-point Likert scale, and adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint, pain scores during access closure, was significantly lower in the FBB group than in the LIA group (0.1 ± 0.37 vs 1.73 ± 0.92; p < 0.001). The FBB group also had significantly lower pain scores during access gain compared to the LIA group (0.83 ± 0.83 vs 2.78 ± 1.26; p < 0.001). There was an inverse relationship between pain scores and FBB after adjustment for age, gender, and body mass index (p < 0.001). FBB group reported significantly higher satisfaction with anesthesia quality compared to the LIA group (6.49 ± 0.64 vs 4.05 ± 1.05; p < 0.001). No complications were recognized in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve blocks offered better acute pain relief and higher patient satisfaction than LIA during femoral arterial access gain and closure.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

In this prospective randomized controlled trial, ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve blocks offered better acute pain relief than local infiltration anesthesia, resulting in enhanced patient satisfaction.

KEY POINTS

• FBB provided better pain relief during access gain and closure than LIA. • FBB offered higher patient satisfaction with the quality of anesthesia than LIA. • No anesthesia-related or access site complications were recognized in either treatment group.

Endovascular revascularization of critical limb ischemia: the role of ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block for the procedural pain management

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of the ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block (PSNB) for pain management during endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From November 2020 to January 2022, 111 CLTI patients that underwent endovascular procedures were prospectively enrolled in this prospective single-arm interventional study. Ultrasound-guided PSNB was used for procedural pain control. Pain intensity was evaluated throughout the procedure (baseline, 10 min after the block, pain peak, and at the end of the procedure) with the visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Forty-six patients underwent above-the-knee revascularization (ATK), 20/111 below-the-knee (BTK) revascularization, 20/111 to both ATK and BTK revascularization. In 25 cases, no endovascular option was feasible at diagnostic angiography. The PSNB was effective in 96% of patients, with no need for further pain management with a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.0001) in the mean value of the VAS from 7.86 ± 1.81 (pre-procedural) to 2.04 ± 2.20 after 10 min from the block and up to 0.74 ± 1.43 at the end of the procedure (mean time 43 min). Only 1 complication related to the popliteal sciatic nerve block was registered (a temporary foot drop, completely resolved within 48 h). The time necessary to perform the block ranged between 4 and 10 min.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided PSNB is a feasible and effective method to manage patients with rest pain and increase comfort and compliance during endovascular procedures.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

An ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block is a safe, feasible, and effective technique to manage pain during endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia, especially in frail patients with multiple comorbidities who are poor candidates for deep sedoanalgesia or general anesthesia.

KEY POINTS

Endovascular treatment of CTLI may require long revascularization sessions in patients with high levels of pain at rest, which could be exacerbated during the revascularization procedure. The PSNB is routinely used for anesthesia and analgesia during foot and ankle surgery, but the experience with lower limb revascularization procedures is very limited and not included in any international guideline. Ultrasound-guided PSNB is a feasible and effective regional anesthesia technique to relieve procedural and resting pain. Because of its safety and availability, every interventional radiologist should know how to perform this type of loco-regional anesthesia.

[Angioplasty with Sirolimus-coated Balloon: the New Standard in the Treatment of PAD?]

Endovascular revascularisation with paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of peripheral artery disease has been shown to be an effective therapeutic option in the femoropopliteal segment. The antiproliferative effect of paclitaxel prevents restenosis. In contrast, in the infra-popliteal segment, the evidence is currently conflicting. However, there is evidence of an increased risk of amputation and mortality from the second year after angioplasty with paclitaxel-coated balloons. This may be due to a dose-dependent cytotoxic effect of paclitaxel. Sirolimus-coated balloons might therefore be an alternative because sirolimus is cytostatic rather than cytotoxic and thus has a wide therapeutic window.Three single-arm pilot studies (50, 25, and 50 patients, respectively) show that angioplasty with sirolimus-coated balloons leads to comparable results to those reported from paclitaxel-coated balloons (late lumen loss at 6 months: 0.29 mm; primary patency at 12 months: femoropopliteal 79%-82%, infra-popliteal 59%; freedom from target lesion revascularization at 12 months: femoropopliteal 83%-94%, infra-popliteal 86%). Randomised controlled trials comparing standard balloon angioplasty and paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of intermittent claudication or chronic limb-threatening ischaemia are active and are expected to provide efficacy and safety results from mid 2024.This review presents the results of pilot studies on angioplasty with sirolimus-coated balloons for the treatment of peripheral artery disease and reviews currently ongoing randomised controlled trials.

Efficacy and Safety of Axiostat® Hemostatic Dressing in Aiding Manual Compression Closure of the Femoral Arterial Access Site in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Treatments: A Preliminary Clinical Experience in Two Centers

BACKGROUND

Hemostasis of the femoral arterial access site by manual compression or a vascular closure device is critical to the safe completion of any endovascular procedure. Previous investigations evaluated the hemostatic efficacy at the radial access site of some chitosan-based hemostatic pads. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of a new chitosan-based hemostatic dressing, namely Axiostat®, in aiding manual compression closure of the femoral arterial access site in patients undergoing endovascular treatments. Furthermore, the outcomes were compared with evidence on manual compression alone and vascular closure devices.

METHODS

This investigation is a two-center retrospective analysis of 120 consecutive patients who had undergone, from July 2022 to February 2023, manual compression closure of the femoral arterial access site aided by the Axiostat® hemostatic dressing. Endovascular procedures performed with introducer sheaths ranging from 4 Fr to 8 Fr were evaluated.

RESULTS

Primary technical success was achieved in 110 (91.7%) patients, with adequate hemostasis obtained in all cases of prolonged manual compression requirements. The mean time-to-hemostasis and time-to-ambulation were 8.9 (±3.9) and 462 (±199) minutes, respectively. Clinical success was achieved in 113 (94.2%) patients, with bleeding-related complications noted in 7 (5.8%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Manual compression aided by the Axiostat® hemostatic dressing is effective and safe in achieving hemostasis of the femoral arterial access site in patients undergoing endovascular treatment with a 4-8 Fr introducer sheath.

Effectiveness and Safety of Atherectomy versus Plain Balloon Angioplasty for Limb Salvage in Tibioperoneal Arterial Disease

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of atherectomy versus plain balloon angioplasty (POBA) for treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI) due to tibioperoneal arterial disease (TPAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients enrolled in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry who had CLI (Rutherford Class 4-6) and underwent atherectomy versus POBA alone for isolated TPAD were retrospectively identified. Of eligible patients, a cohort of 2,908 patients was propensity matched 1:1 by clinical and angiographic characteristics. The atherectomy group comprised 1,454 patients with 2,183 arteries treated, and the POBA group comprised 1,454 patients with 2,141 arteries treated. The primary study endpoint was major ipsilateral limb amputation. Secondary endpoints were minor ipsilateral amputations, any ipsilateral amputation, primary patency, target vessel reintervention (TVR), and wound healing at 12 months.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 507 days, the mean patient age was 69 years ± 11.7, and the mean occluded length was 6.9 cm ± 6.5. There was a trend toward higher technical success rates with atherectomy than with POBA (92.9% vs 91.0%, respectively; P = .06). The rates of major adverse events during the procedure were not significantly different. The 12-month major amputation rate was similar in the atherectomy and POBA groups (4.5% vs 4.6%, respectively; P = .92; odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.68-1.37). There was no difference in 12-month TVR (17.9% vs 17.8%; P = .97) or primary patency (56.4% vs 54.5%; P = .64) between the atherectomy and POBA groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large national registry, treatment of CLI from TPAD using atherectomy versus POBA showed no significant differences in procedural adverse events, major amputations, TVR, or vessel patency at 12 months.

One year clinical outcomes of Rutherford 6 chronic limb threatening ischemia patients undergoing lower limb endovascular revascularisation from Singapore

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is widely used as a first-line revascularisation option in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI). This study aimed to evaluate the short-term endovascular revascularisation treatment outcomes of a cohort of Rutherford 6 (R6) CLTI patients, from a multi-ethnic Asian population in Singapore. Patients with R6 CLTI who underwent endovascular revascularisation from June 2019 to February 2020 at Singapore General Hospital, a tertiary vascular centre in Singapore, were included and followed up for one year. Primary outcome measures included number and type of reinterventions required, 3-, 6- and 12-month mortality, 6- and 12-month amputation free survival (AFS), wound healing success and changes in Rutherford staging after 3, 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-five procedures were performed on 86 patients, of whom 78 (90.7%) were diabetics, 54 (62.8%) had coronary artery disease (CAD) and 54 (62.8%) had chronic kidney disease (CKD). 42 patients (48.8%) required reintervention within 6 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of CAD was a significant independent predictor for reintervention. Mortality was 15.1%, 20.9% and 33.7% at 3, 6 and 12 months respectively. AFS was 64.0% and 49.4% at 6 and 12 months. Inability to ambulate, congestive heart failure (CHF), dysrhythmia and CKD were significant independent predictors of lower 12-month AFS.

CONCLUSIONS

PTA for R6 CLTI patients was associated with relatively high mortality and reintervention rates at one year. CAD was an independent predictor of reintervention. More research is required to help risk stratify which CLTI patients would benefit from an endovascular-first approach versus conservative treatment or an immediate major lower extremity amputation policy.