Randomized Study of Noninferiority Comparing Prosthetic and Autologous Vein Above-Knee Femoropopliteal Bypasses

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the autogenous vein bypass versus a prosthetic graft for above-the-knee femoropopliteal bypass surgery in patients with intermittent claudication

OBJECTIVES

According to guidelines, the autogenous saphenous vein (ASV) is the preferred conduit for femoropopliteal bypass surgery in all patients with peripheral artery disease. However, in contrast to patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), patients with intermittent claudication (IC) only, tend to have milder disease, and thus a prosthetic graft may be as good as a vein conduit. The objective of this study was to compare patency rates of the ASV and a prosthetic graft in femoropopliteal bypass surgery in patients with IC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing prosthetic graft versus ASV in patients with IC. Articles with a mixed IC and CLI study population were included if more than 50% of the study cohort was treated for IC. Primary analysis was performed on IC patients only. Secondary analysis was performed on the mixed group. The primary endpoint was short- and long-term patency and secondary endpoints were complications, limb salvage, and mortality.

RESULTS

In total, six studies with 524 patients were included. Only two studies reported solely on patients with IC. All these patients underwent above-the-knee bypasses and average patency rates at one and 5 years were 88% and 76% vs 81% and 68% in the ASV and the PTFE groups, respectively. One and five-year patency was not statistically different between the groups (OR 5.21; 95% CI 0.60-45.36 and OR 2.10; 95% CI 0.88-5.01). In a mixed population of patients with IC and CLI (84% IC patients), 1 year patency was comparable (OR 1.40; 95% CI 0.87-2.25). However, after a follow-up of over 3 years, this mixed group had significantly higher patency rates in favour of the ASV (OR 2.06; 95 % CI 1.30-3.26). Complication and amputation rates were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited data are available for patients receiving above-the-knee femoropopliteal bypass for intermittent claudication. The ASV remains the conduit of choice for femoropopliteal bypass surgery. However, the prosthetic conduit seems a feasible alternative for patients with intermittent claudication in whom the ASV is not present or unsuitable.

ZILVERPASS Study: ZILVER PTX Stent versus Prosthetic Above-the-Knee Bypass Surgery in Femoropopliteal Lesions, 5-year Results

PURPOSE

To report the 60-month safety and effectiveness results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the ZILVER PTX paclitaxel-eluting stent to prosthetic above-the-knee bypass for the treatment of symptomatic TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) C and D femoropopliteal lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were enrolled between October 2013 and July 2017. One of the secondary outcomes was primary patency at 60 months, defined as no evidence of binary restenosis or occlusion within the target lesion or bypass graft based on a duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity ratio < 2.4 and no clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in endovascular cases or reintervention to restore flow in the bypass at 60 months. Survival rates after 5 years were also analyzed.

RESULTS

220 patients (mean age 68.6 ± 10.5 years; 159 men) were included and randomized to ZILVER PTX (n = 113, 51.40%) or BYPASS group (n = 107, 48.60%). The 60-month primary patency rate was 49.3% for the ZILVER PTX group versus 40.7% for the bypass group (p = 0.6915). Freedom from TLR was 63.8% for the ZILVER PTX group versus 52.8% for the bypass group (p = 0.2637). At 5 years, no significant difference in survival rate could be seen between the ZILVER PTX and the bypass group (69.1% vs. 71% respectively, p = 0.5503).

CONCLUSION

Even at 5 years, non-inferior safety and effectiveness results of the ZILVER PTX could be seen. These findings confirmed that the use of ZILVER PTX stents can be considered as a valid alternative for bypass surgery when treating long and complex femoropopliteal lesions.

Evaluation of Long-Term Outcomes of Femoropopliteal Bypass Surgery in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia in an Endovascular Era

BACKGROUND

To investigate the long-term outcomes of femoropopliteal bypass surgery in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II (TASC II), type D (TASC D) femoropopliteal disease.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed for all consecutive patients undergoing above-knee (AK) femoropopliteal bypass surgery at an academic vascular centre between January 2007 and March 2019. Patients with claudication (IC) and patients with CLTI were included. Patency rates and freedom from major adverse limb events (MALE) after 5 years were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 432 femoropopliteal grafts were performed. Indications for surgery were claudication and CLTI in 232 (53.7%) and 200 (46.3%) patients, respectively. Graft material was autologous vein in 186 patients (43.1%), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) in 128 patients (29.6%), and heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (HePTFE) in 118 patients (27.3%). At the 5-year follow-up, the primary patency rate was 58.1% and 58.3% in patients with CLTI and claudication, respectively. Secondary patency rates were 74.1% and 68.6%, respectively. Freedom from MALE was 64.5% and 61.9%, respectively. Analyses of graft material in the CLTI group showed that, at 5 years, autologous vein grafts had better long-term patency rates than PTFE and HePTFE grafts. At 5 years, the primary and secondary patency rate for autologous vein grafts were 63.2% (P= 0.324) and 83.2% (P = 0.020), respectively. Freedom from MALE was 72.0% with the use of autologous vein grafts, 47.9% using PTFE and, 52.9% using HePTFE, respectively (P= 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that femoropopliteal bypass surgery in patients with TASC D lesions is safe and effective in the long term. Autologous vein grafts remain the first choice for patients with CLTI, also for bypasses in AK position. However, prosthetic grafts in AK the position are an acceptable alternative for revascularisation when the saphenous vein is not available.

A case of occluded femoropopliteal saphenous vein bypass with threatening limb ischemia treated with endovascular stent graft relining

A 61-year-old man presented with chronic limb threatening ischemia due to reocclusion of a femoropopliteal (FP) bypass using a saphenous vein graft (SVG). After performing endovascular intervention using plain angioplasty and drug-coated balloon and drug-eluting stent implantation of the proximal anastomosis of FP bypass, refractory early reocclusion occurred during the perioperative period. Thus, we decided to alternatively place a stent-graft in the occluded FP bypass. After the SVG had been dilated using a high-pressure balloon, a stent-graft was successfully placed. This alternative therapy using a stent-graft prevented SVG FP bypass reocclusion, and the patient's ulcers had completely healed within 1 month.

Asia-Pacific Consensus Statement on the Management of Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report from the Asian Pacific Society of Atherosclerosis and Vascular Disease Asia-Pacific Peripheral Artery Disease Consensus Statement Project Committee

BACKGROUND

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is the most underdiagnosed, underestimated and undertreated of the atherosclerotic vascular diseases despite its poor prognosis. There may be racial or contextual differences in the Asia-Pacific region as to epidemiology, availability of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, and even patient treatment response. The Asian Pacific Society of Atherosclerosis and Vascular Diseases (APSAVD) thus coordinated the development of an Asia-Pacific Consensus Statement (APCS) on the Management of PAD.

OBJECTIVES

The APSAVD aimed to accomplish the following: 1) determine the applicability of the 2016 AHA/ACC guidelines on the Management of Patients with Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease to the Asia-Pacific region; 2) review Asia-Pacific literature; and 3) increase the awareness of PAD.

METHODOLOGY

A Steering Committee was organized to oversee development of the APCS, appoint a Technical Working Group (TWG) and Consensus Panel (CP). The TWG appraised the relevance of the 2016 AHA/ACC PAD Guideline and proposed recommendations which were reviewed by the CP using a modified Delphi technique.

RESULTS

A total of 91 recommendations were generated covering history and physical examination, diagnosis, and treatment of PAD-3 new recommendations, 31 adaptations and 57 adopted statements. This Asia-Pacific Consensus Statement on the Management of PAD constitutes the first for the Asia-Pacific Region. It is intended for use by health practitioners involved in preventing, diagnosing and treating patients with PAD and ultimately the patients and their families themselves.

ZILVERPASS Study: ZILVER PTX Stent vs Bypass Surgery in Femoropopliteal Lesions

Purpose: To report the 12-month results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial to determine if the ZILVER PTX paclitaxel-eluting stent was noninferior in terms of safety and efficacy compared with surgical bypass. Materials and Methods: This is a study in symptomatic TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) C and D femoropopliteal lesions comparing endovascular ZILVER PTX stenting vs surgical bypass surgery using a prosthetic graft ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01952457). Between October 2013 and July 2017, 220 patients (mean age 68.6±10.5 years; 159 men) were enrolled and randomized to the ZILVER PTX treatment group (113, 51.4%) or the bypass treatment group (107, 48.6%). Most of the lesions were occlusions (208, 94.5%); the mean lesion length was 247.1±69.3 mm. The primary outcome measure was primary patency at 12 months, defined as no evidence of binary restenosis or occlusion within the target lesion or bypass graft based on a duplex-derived peak systolic velocity ratio <2.4 and no clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in endovascular cases or reintervention to restore flow in the bypass. Results: The estimated 12-month primary patency rate was 74.5% (95% CI 66.3% to 82.7%) for the ZILVER PTX group vs 72.5% (95% CI 63.7% to 81.3%) for the bypass arm (p=0.998). Freedom from TLR at 12 months was 80.9% (95% CI 73.3% to 88.5%) for the ZILVER PTX group vs 76.2% (95% CI 68.0% to 84.4%) for the bypass group (p=0.471). The 30-day complication rate was significantly lower in the ZILVER PTX group (4.4% vs 11.3%, p=0.004). Also, procedure time and hospital stay were significantly shorter in the ZILVER PTX group (p<0.001 for both). Conclusion: With noninferior patency results, a lower complication rate, and shorter procedures and hospital stays, paclitaxel-eluting stenting might become a recommended treatment for long TASC C and D femoropopliteal lesions.

[Revascularisation in patients with failed previous arterial reconstructions]

Redo arterial reconstructions are followed by advanced surgical risk or impossible in some cases. Active introduction of endovascular surgery complements the capabilities of conventional surgical approach. It is presented case report of restoration of patency of synthetic femoral-popliteal shunt with previous occlusion for a long time. The technique of recanalization and stenting of allograft is described. Immediate results are favorable but further research is needed.

The current state of surgical bypass versus drug eluting stents for long femoropopliteal occlusive lesions

Considerable advances have been made over the last decade in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Historically, endovascular treatment has been the accepted approach for short lesions and surgical bypass for long, complex femoropopliteal lesions. However, bypass surgery holds significant risk of mortality and morbidity for the patient. That toll includes prolonged hospitalization, as well as the potential for wound healing and systemic complications, all of which are intensified by the ageing population. Advances in endovascular devices, such as drug eluting stents present an alternative, minimally invasive treatment option which may more suitable for complex lesions in a high-risk population. The aim of this review is to discuss the current literature which addresses surgical bypass and drug eluting stents, particularly for the treatment of long, complex femoropopliteal disease.

Vein Versus Prosthetic Graft for Femoropopliteal Bypass Above the Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Conflicting evidence exists surrounding which conduit material is preferable in above-knee femoropopliteal bypass surgery. We performed a systemic review of electronic information sources to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vein versus prosthetic grafts in above-knee femoropopliteal bypasses. Eight RCTs reporting 1271 grafts (608 saphenous vein and 663 prosthetic) in 1132 patients were included. At 5 years, the vein group had significantly higher primary patency (odds ratio [OR]: 1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17-2.55, P = 0.006), primary assisted patency (OR: 4.02, 95% CI: 2.84-5.70, P < 0.0001), and secondary patency (OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.20-2.80, P = 0.005) rates compared with the prosthetic group. The vein group required significantly fewer reinterventions (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.18-0.60, P = 0.0003). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (risk difference: −0.01, 95% CI: −0.02 to 0.01, P = 0.34), 30-day morbidity (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 0.61-4.06, P = 0.35), major amputation (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.43-1.18, P = 0.19), or overall survival (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.70-1.30, P = 0.76) when comparing vein versus prosthetic grafts. Our analysis supports the use of the saphenous vein in above-knee femoropopliteal bypass grafting owing to its superiority in primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency rates and less need for reintervention when compared with prosthetic grafts.

Graft type for femoro-popliteal bypass surgery

BACKGROUND

Femoro-popliteal bypass is implemented to save limbs that might otherwise require amputation, in patients with ischaemic rest pain or tissue loss; and to improve walking distance in patients with severe life-limiting claudication. Contemporary practice involves grafts using autologous vein, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) or Dacron as a bypass conduit. This is the second update of a Cochrane review first published in 1999 and last updated in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of bypass graft type in the treatment of stenosis or occlusion of the femoro-popliteal arterial segment, for above- and below-knee femoro-popliteal bypass grafts.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Vascular Specialised Register (13 March 2017) and CENTRAL (2017, Issue 2). Trial registries were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing at least two different types of femoro-popliteal grafts for arterial reconstruction in patients with femoro-popliteal ischaemia. Randomised controlled trials comparing bypass grafting to angioplasty or to other interventions were not included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both review authors (GKA and CPT) independently screened studies, extracted data, assessed trials for risk of bias and graded the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nineteen randomised controlled trials, with a total of 3123 patients (2547 above-knee, 576 below-knee bypass surgery). In total, nine graft types were compared (autologous vein, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) with and without vein cuff, human umbilical vein (HUV), polyurethane (PUR), Dacron and heparin bonded Dacron (HBD); FUSION BIOLINE and Dacron with external support). Studies differed in which graft types they compared and follow-up ranged from six months to 10 years.Above-knee bypassFor above-knee bypass, there was moderate-quality evidence that autologous vein grafts improve primary patency compared to prosthetic grafts by 60 months (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.80; 3 studies, 269 limbs; P = 0.005). We found low-quality evidence to suggest that this benefit translated to improved secondary patency by 60 months (Peto OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74; 2 studies, 176 limbs; P = 0.003).We found no clear difference between Dacron and PTFE graft types for primary patency by 60 months (Peto OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.90; 2 studies, 247 limbs; low-quality evidence). We found low-quality evidence that Dacron grafts improved secondary patency over PTFE by 24 months (Peto OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.28; 2 studies, 528 limbs; P = 0.03), an effect which continued to 60 months in the single trial reporting this timepoint (Peto OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.31 to 4.53; 167 limbs; P = 0.005).Externally supported prosthetic grafts had inferior primary patency at 24 months when compared to unsupported prosthetic grafts (Peto OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.29 to 3.35; 2 studies, 270 limbs; P = 0.003). Secondary patency was similarly affected in the single trial reporting this outcome (Peto OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.07; 236 limbs; P = 0.008). No data were available for 60 months follow-up.HUV showed benefits in primary patency over PTFE at 24 months (Peto OR 4.80, 95% CI 1.76 to 13.06; 82 limbs; P = 0.002). This benefit was still seen at 60 months (Peto OR 3.75, 95% CI 1.46 to 9.62; 69 limbs; P = 0.006), but this was only compared in one trial. Results were similar for secondary patency at 24 months (Peto OR 4.01, 95% CI 1.44 to 11.17; 93 limbs) and at 60 months (Peto OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.65 to 9.05; 93 limbs).We found HBD to be superior to PTFE for primary patency at 60 months for above-knee bypass, but these results were based on a single trial (Peto OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.72; 146 limbs; very low-quality evidence). There was no difference in primary patency between HBD and HUV for above-knee bypass in the one small study which reported this outcome.We found only one small trial studying PUR and it showed very poor primary and secondary patency rates which were inferior to Dacron at all time points.Below-knee bypassFor bypass below the knee, we found no graft type to be superior to any other in terms of primary patency, though one trial showed improved secondary patency of HUV over PTFE at all time points to 24 months (Peto OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.45 to 7.97; 88 limbs; P = 0.005).One study compared PTFE alone to PTFE with vein cuff; very low-quality evidence indicates no effect to either primary or secondary patency at 24 months (Peto OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.01; 182 limbs; 2 studies; P = 0.80 and Peto OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.23; 181 limbs; 2 studies; P = 0.51 respectively)Limited data were available for limb survival, and those studies reporting on this outcome showed no clear difference between graft types for this outcome. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant protocols varied extensively between trials, and in some cases within trials.The overall quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Issues which affected the quality of the evidence included differences in the design of the trials, and differences in the types of grafts they compared. These differences meant we were often only able to combine and analyse small numbers of participants and this resulted in uncertainty over the true effects of the graft type used.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was moderate-quality evidence of improved long-term (60 months) primary patency for autologous vein grafts when compared to prosthetic materials for above-knee bypasses. In the long term (two to five years) there was low-quality evidence that Dacron confers a small secondary patency benefit over PTFE for above-knee bypass. Only very low-quality data exist on below-knee bypasses, so we are uncertain which graft type is best. Further randomised data are needed to ascertain whether this information translates into an improvement in limb survival.