Antithrombotic therapy after femoropopliteal artery stenting: 12-month results from Japan Postmarketing Surveillance

Cilostazol after endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal peripheral arterial disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endovascular therapy (ET) outcomes for femoropopliteal peripheral arterial disease (FP-PAD) remain suboptimal. Cilostazol therapy may improve patency rates and decrease major adverse limb events after ET for FP-PAD. Our goal was to analyze published studies evaluating the use of cilostazol after ET for FP-PAD.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for randomized and observational studies (OSs) evaluating cilostazol therapy after ET for FP-PAD. We only included OSs adjusting for confounding variables. We analyzed observational and randomized studies separately and explored heterogeneity by estimating an I2 statistic. A fixed-effects model was chosen if the I2 statistic was low. If the two-sided probability of observing the difference between groups under a true null hypothesis was <5%, we considered this difference statistically significant.

RESULTS

We screened 2171 studies and included 26 papers in our analysis (5 randomized controlled trials and 21 OSs). All randomized studies were open label. In randomized studies, the odds of restenosis were lower in patients treated with cilostazol (pooled odds ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.43; P < .01; I2 = 0%). The odds of target lesion revascularization (TLR) were also lower in patients treated with cilostazol (pooled odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.22-0.65; P < .01; I2 = 0%). In OSs, we also identified associations between peri-interventional treatment with cilostazol and lower rates of restenosis (pooled hazard ratio [pHR], 0.57; 95% CI, 0.51-0.65; P < .01; I2 = 34%), TLR (pHR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.79; P < .01; I2 = 0%), and amputation (pHR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.90; P = .02; I2 = 30%).

CONCLUSIONS

In randomized open-label studies, peri-interventional treatment with cilostazol after ET for FP-PAD decreased the odds of restenosis and TLR (Level 1A). Similarly, in OSs that adjusted for confounding, peri-interventional cilostazol therapy was associated with lower rates of restenosis, TLR, and amputation (Level 2A).

The effect of cilostazol on late outcomes after endovascular treatment for occlusive femoropopliteal disease

OBJECTIVE

Restenosis and late occlusion remain a significant problem for endovascular treatment of peripheral artery disease. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of cilostazol on late outcomes after endovascular repair of occlusive femoropopliteal disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted conforming to established criteria to identify articles published up to September 2023 evaluating late outcomes after endovascular treatment for atherosclerotic femoropopliteal disease. Eligible studies should compare outcomes between patients treated with cilostazol and patients not treated with cilostazol. Both prospective and retrospective studies were eligible. Late outcomes included primary patency (PP), restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major amputation during follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 clinical studies were identified for analysis including 4721 patients (1831 with cilostazol vs 2890 without cilostazol) that were treated for 5703 lesions (2235 with cilostazol vs 3468 without cilostazol). All studies were performed in Japan. Mean follow-up was 24.1 ± 12.5 months. Cilostazol was associated with a lower risk for restenosis (pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.503; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.383-0.660; P < .0001). However, no association was found between cilostazol and TLR (pooled OR, 0.918; 95% CI, 0.300-2.812; P = .881) as well as major amputation (pooled OR, 1.512; 95% CI, 0.734-3.116; P = .263). Regarding primary patency, cilostazol was associated with a higher 12-month PP (OR, 3.047; 95% CI, 1.168-7.946; P = .023), and a higher 36-month PP (OR, 1.616; 95% CI, 1.412-1.850; P < .0001). No association was found between cilostazol and mortality during follow-up (pooled OR, .755; 95% CI, 0.293-1.946; P = .561).

CONCLUSIONS

Cilostazol seems to have a positive effect on 1- to 3-year PP and restenosis rates among patients treated endovascularly for atherosclerotic femoropopliteal disease. A positive effect on TLR and amputation risk was not verified in this review.

Antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy after revascularization for lower extremity artery disease: a national survey and literature overview

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet therapy (APT) after interventions for lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is recommended. However, (inter)national guidelines vary on type and duration of APT. This report aimed to present the results of a survey on antithrombotic prescribing patterns after lower limb interventions in the Netherlands and an overview of the available literature on this topic.

METHODS

Vascular surgeons from the Dutch Society for Vascular Surgery and interventional radiologists from the Dutch Society for Interventional Radiology received an online survey on the type and duration of antithrombotic medication after lower limb interventions.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 139 of 285 vascular surgeons (49%) and 24 of 288 (8%) interventional radiologists. Clopidogrel was the most prescribed drug after iliac percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) (77%), femoral PTA (77%), femoral PTA with drug-coated balloon (66%), and femoropopliteal (80%) and femorocrural (51%) prosthetic bypasses. Dual APT (DAPT), consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel, was most often prescribed after femoral PTA with stenting (56%) and crural PTAs (55% without stent, 73% with stent). Vitamin K antagonists were most often prescribed after femoropopliteal (83%) and femorocrural (80%) venous bypasses. Aspirin monotherapy prescription varied from 1% to 8% after interventions. Many interventional radiologists responded that they only advise in medication prescription but do not prescribe themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescription of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy in LEAD patients after femoral and crural interventions varies widely among Dutch vascular surgeons, mostly between clopidogrel and DAPT. The duration of DAPT is also highly variable. These results reflect low-level evidence and discrepancy in current guideline recommendations.

Peak systolic velocity ratio derived from quantitative vessel analysis for restenosis after femoropopliteal intervention: a multidisciplinary review from Endovascular Asia

With technological improvements in the endovascular armamentarium, there have been tremendous advances in catheter-based femoropopliteal artery intervention during the last decade. However, standardization of the methodology for assessing outcomes has been underappreciated, and unvalidated peak systolic velocity ratios (PSVRs) of 2.0, 2.4, and 2.5 on duplex ultrasonography have been arbitrarily but routinely used for assessing restenosis. Quantitative vessel analysis (QVA) is a widely accepted method to identify restenosis in a broad spectrum of cardiovascular interventions, and PSVR needs to be validated by QVA. This multidisciplinary review is intended to disseminate the importance of QVA and a validated PSVR based on QVA for binary restenosis in contemporary femoropopliteal intervention.