Results From the VISIBILITY Iliac Study: Primary and Cohort Outcomes at 9 Months

Treatment of iliac atherosclerotic lesions using the balloon-expandable dynamic bare metal stent: One-year outcomes of the BIODYNAMIC single-center retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular therapy using balloon expandable stents has become the treatment standard for most iliac atherosclerotic lesions. We aimed to assess the safety and performance of the Dynamic stainless-steel balloon-expanding stent system in this location.

METHODS

BIODYNAMIC is a retrospective single center study including consecutive patients with iliac lesions treated with the Dynamic stent system. Not included were implantations inside an endograft. The primary endpoint was freedom from major adverse limb events (MALE) at 12 months, defined as index limb amputation or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary endpoints were procedure success, ankle brachial index (ABI) and Rutherford class change, mortality and freedom from TLR after 12 months.

RESULTS

Within two years, 182 patients with 234 lesions in the common iliac artery were enrolled. Rutherford class 5 and 6 were present in 11.5% of patients, average stent diameter was 8.0 ± 0.5 mm and stented length 40.0 ± 15.3 mm. The primary endpoint was reached in 96.2% (225/234) of the cases, with six TLR (2.6%) and three target limb amputations (1.3%). Procedure success was obtained in all but three patients (98.4%). In paired analysis, ABI improved by 0.25 ± 0.21 from baseline to 0.90 ± 0.16 post-procedure and Rutherford class improved by -1.75 ± 1.53. There were four non-device-related deaths (2.2%). Freedom from TLR was 97%, 95.3%, 94% and 92.7% at 24, 36, 48 and 60 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The Dynamic balloon-expandable stent system proved to be safe and effective in a population with common iliac artery lesions.

[Predictive factors of amputation after iliac angioplasty in patients with severe artery disease]

INTRODUCTION

Despite the success of angioplasty of the iliac artery, this technique remains associated with significant amputation rates. The purpose of this study was to identify predictive factors for lower limb amputation after iliac angioplasty in patients with critical ischemia.

METHODS

We reported a retrospective study including patients who successfully underwent angioplasty of the iliac artery between 2014 and 2018. The primary endpoint was limb salvage at 1 month. The variables were studied in univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Our study included 86 patients. The median age was 57±10 and the sex ratio was 4.7. Cardiovascular risk factors were represented by smoking in 14 cases (16.3%), diabetes in 25 cases (29.1%), arterial hypertension in 2 cases (2.3%) and dyslipidemia in 2 cases (2.3%). Seventy patients (81.3%) were classified as stage 4 according to the Leriche and Fontaine classification and 16 patients (18.7%) were classified as stage 3. The lesions were stenosing in 48 cases (55.8%) and occlusive in 38 cases (44.2%). These lesions were classified according to the TASC classification "Trans-Atlantic-Society-Consensus" in TASC A-B in 61 cases (70.9%) and TASC C-D in 35 cases (29.1%). Distal arteritis was found in 8 cases (9.3%). Balloon angioplasty was performed in 36 cases (41.8%) and angioplasty stenting in 50 cases (58.2%). At 1 month, the amputation rate was 9.3%. Univariate analysis showed that diabetes and smoking were the most important factors associated with amputation (respectively P=0.007, OR=9.31, 95% CI=[1.73-50.07] and P=0.022; OR=6.8; 95% CI=[1.46 to 31.61]). Multivariate analysis showed that diabetes and distal arteritis were the predictive factors for amputation (respectively P=0.034, OR=21.06, 95% CI=[1.25 to 354.46] and P=0.008, OR=11,61, 95% CI=[1.88 to 71.69]).

CONCLUSION

Diabetes and distal arteritis are the predictive factors for lower limb amputation after iliac angioplasty.

Meta-analysis of direct surgical versus endovascular revascularization for aortoiliac occlusive disease

OBJECTIVE

There is a paucity of good-quality evidence comparing direct surgical (DS) with endovascular/hybrid (EVH) revascularization for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of studies comparing DS and EVH revascularization for AIOD.

METHODS

PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for studies comparing DS and EVH revascularization for AIOD from 2000 to 2018. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Demographics, clinical presentation, and comorbidities of the two groups were compared. Kaplan-Meier curves from selected studies were digitized with WebPlotDigitizer. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager, and outcome measures were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed for primary patency in the EVH group.

RESULTS

Eleven observational studies were identified comparing a sample of 4030 patients. The median Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score was 19 of 24. A total of 1679 and 2351 patients underwent DS and EVH techniques, respectively. No significant difference was found between means for sex, claudication, rest pain, tissue loss, preoperative ankle-brachial pressure index, and TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus C and D lesions in the two groups averaged across studies. However, the DS group had significantly younger patients (average age, 61.83 vs 66.77; P = .0011). The risk factors of the two groups, such as smoking, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, renal failure, and chronic lung disease, were comparable. Average hospital stay was significantly higher for the DS group (7.76 days vs 3.12 days; P = .025). Change in ankle-brachial pressure index, 30-day mortality, and 30-day graft/stent thrombosis were not significantly different for the groups. Overall, primary patency for a median follow-up of 50 months favored the DS group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.51; confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.73; P = .0002). There was moderate heterogeneity among studies (I² = 46%). The HR for the subgroup for which endovascular procedures were combined with common femoral endarterectomy was 0.43 compared with 0.88 for endovascular revascularization alone. Limb salvage was similar in both groups (HR, 1.10; CI, 0.74-1.64; P = .63), but overall survival after the procedure favored the DS group (HR, 0.75; CI, 0.60-0.94; P = .01; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality studies showed that DS revascularization had significantly better primary patency than EVH revascularization for AIOD, although DS patients were younger and may have differed on other confounding variables. Both techniques had similar limb salvage rates, and the primary patency was better for endovascular revascularization combined with common femoral endarterectomy than for endovascular revascularization alone.