Cryoplasty as Endovascular Treatment in the Femoropopliteal Region: Hemodynamic Results and Follow-up at One Year

Cryoplasty for peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous balloon angioplasty is an endovascular technique for restoring blood flow through an artery that has become narrowed or blocked by atherosclerosis. Narrowing of the artery following angioplasty (restenosis) is the major cause of long-term failure. Cryoplasty offers a different approach to improving long-term angioplasty results. It combines the dilation force of balloon angioplasty with cooling of the vessel wall. This systematic review evaluated cryoplasty in peripheral arterial disease and provides focus for further research in the field. This is an update of a review first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of, and complications associated with, cryoplasty for maintaining patency in the iliac, femoropopliteal and crural arteries in the short and medium term.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched October 2012) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 10). Trial databases were searched for ongoing or unpublished studies. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials in which participants with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) of the lower limbs, or lower limb bypass graft stenoses, were randomised to cryoplasty with or without another procedure versus a procedure without cryoplasty were considered. This included trials where all participants received angioplasty and the randomisation was for cryoplasty versus no cryoplasty and trials where cryoplasty was used as an adjunct to conventional treatment (for example stenting) against a control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed, assessed and selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials (six primary cryoplasty and one adjunctive cryoplasty trial) with a combined total of 478 patients were included in this review. The trials reported patency and restenosis either by participant, lesion or vessel location. Follow-up ranged from 30 days to three years.Target lesion patency measured at various time points in two primary cryoplasty trials showed no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups. The adjunctive cryoplasty study showed that cryoplasty was associated with improved patency only at six months (OR 5.37, 95% CI 1.09 to 26.49, n = 90).Restenosis measured per patient (two primary cryoplasty trials) showed no statistically significant difference between the treatments. Restenosis measured by lesion (two primary cryoplasty trials) showed a statistically significant difference only within 24 hours of the procedure (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18, n = 192) favouring cryoplasty.Need for re-intervention was not significantly different in primary cryoplasty trial participants (per participant: OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.52, n = 241, I(2) = 89%; per lesion: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.06 to 5.69, n = 307, I(2) = 94%). The adjunctive cryoplasty trial did not report on need for intervention.Immediate success of procedure (within 24 hours) was not significantly different in primary cryoplasty trial participants (per participant: OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.14 to 19.55, n = 340, I(2) = 95%; per lesion: OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.19 to 17.36, n = 397, I(2) = 90%). The adjunctive cryoplasty trial reported 100% success.Limb loss, deaths from all causes and the risk of complications immediately after treatment showed no statistically significant differences between the treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The benefit of cryoplasty over conventional angioplasty cannot be established as the number of randomised controlled trials is small and their quality is not sufficiently high. The technical success and primary patency rates seen in these trials are inconsistent and do not necessarily suggest a future role for cryoplasty in the treatment of PAD, but they cannot be reliably interpreted. Currently there are insufficient data to support the routine use of cryoplasty over conventional balloon angioplasty in the treatment of PAD.

Cryoplasty offers no advantage over standard balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent stenosis

In-stent restenosis is the primary failure mode of endovascular treatment of occlusive disease in the femeropopliteal segment. Cryoplasty has been proposed to reduce intimal hyperplasia through induction of apoptosis. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of cryoplasty for treatment of in-stent restenosis compared to conventional balloon angioplasty (CBA). After IRB approval, a retrospective record review was performed of reinterventions for in-stent restenosis by a single vascular surgery group at a university hospital. Reinterventions involving cryoplasty and CBA were evaluated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention with duplex imaging to identify significant recurrent stenosis utilizing established velocity criteria. Data collected included basic demographic information and comorbidities as well as time to restenosis. Statistical analysis was performed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves with the log rank test, Wilcoxon rank test, and Cox proportional hazards models. From December 2004 to November 2007, 76 reinterventions were performed using CBA (n = 39) or cryoplasty (n = 37) for in-stent restenosis without placement of additional stents. Periprocedural technical success (>30% residual stenosis) was 100% for both groups, with no complications. The two cohorts were statistically similar in mean age, gender, comorbidities, tobacco use and use of statins, aspirin and Plavix. However, the mean lesion length was significantly longer in the cryoplasty cohort (CBA: 140.9 mm, Cyro: 191.7 mm; P = 0.032). The mean time to recurrent stenosis or need for additional secondary intervention was significantly shorter for the cyroplasty cohort than for the CBA, 4.09 and 10.79 months, respectively ( P = .0001). Recurrent stenosis-free survival was significantly lower in the cyroplasty cohort at 3 months (CBA: 96.9%, Cyro: 88.9%) and 6 months (CBA: 84.0%, Cyro: 43.8%; P = .0089). Cyroplasty as a modality for treatment of in-stent stenosis in the femoropopliteal segment offers no benefit over CBA.