Adjunctive Utilization of Intravascular Ultrasound in Peripheral Arterial Disease Treatment

BACKGROUND

The utility and benefit of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been well established in coronary interventions, however widespread adoption for peripheral interventions has lagged. The objectives of this review article were to discuss the technical components of IVUS, describe key learning pearls for IVUS utilization, and review the literature describing the clinical outcomes of endovascular peripheral arterial interventions using IVUS.

METHODS

A scoping review of the current literature utilizing Pubmed. Terms used to search the literature included "intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)" in conjunction with "peripheral arterial disease (PAD)," "endovascular interventions," "chronic limb threatening ischemia," "balloon angioplasty" "stenting," "percutaneous coronary intervention," and "outcomes." All types of articles were reviewed including review articles, retrospective reviews, meta-analyses, and prospective observational and randomized studies.

RESULTS

Published literature regarding IVUS use in peripheral arterial interventions is heterogeneous and limited to mainly retrospective studies, registry analyses and metanalyses. Outcomes are generally favorable with the adjunct of IVUS compared to traditional angiography-driven peripheral interventions. The addition of IVUS improves stent expansion, stent patency, and reduces reintervention rates, particularly in infrainguinal arterial lesions. Long-term costs may also be lower with IVUS-guided procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Expert consensus largely supports the implementation of IVUS in endovascular interventions for peripheral arterial disease. However, more robust high-quality data evaluating the efficacy, durability, and cost of IVUS in peripheral arterial disease are still needed.

Intravascular Ultrasound Use is Associated with Improved Patency in Lower Extremity Peripheral Arterial Interventions

BACKGROUND

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) facilitates detailed visualization of endoluminal anatomy not adequately appreciated on conventional angiography. However, it is unclear if IVUS use improves clinical outcomes of peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) for peripheral arterial disease. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of IVUS on 1-year outcomes of PVI in the vascular quality initiative (VQI).

METHODS

The VQI-PVI modules were reviewed (2016-2020). All patients with available 1-year follow-up after lower extremity PVI were included and grouped as IVUS-PVI or non-IVUS PVI based on use of IVUS. Propensity matching (1:1) was performed using demographics and comorbidities. One-year major amputation and patency rates were compared. A generalized estimating equation model was used to identify predictors of 1-year outcomes. Subgroup analysis based on Trans-Atlantic Intersociety Consensus (TASC) classification, treatment length and treatment modalities were performed using same modeling approaches.

RESULTS

There were 56,633 procedures (non-IVUS PVI = 55,302 vs. IVUS-PVI = 1,331) in 44,042 patients. Propensity matching yielded a total cohort of 1,854 patients matched (1:1), with no baseline differences. Lower extremity revascularization for claudication was performed in 60.4%, while one-third (33.9%) had chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI). IVUS was more commonly used for lesions >15 cm in length (46.6% vs. 43.3%) and for aortoiliac disease (31.8% vs. 27.2%). Rates of atherectomy and stenting were significantly higher with IVUS-PVI (21.1% vs. 16.8%), while balloon angioplasty was less common (13.5% vs. 24.4%). One-year patency was better with IVUS-PVI (97.7% vs. 95.2%, P = 0.004). On subgroup analysis, IVUS (odds ratio [OR] 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-3.75) was associated with improved patency in CLTI patients, TASC C or D lesions, and treatment length >15 cm. Adjunctive IVUS use during PVI did not significantly impact 1-year amputation (OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.78-3.91). On multivariable regression, adjunctive use of IVUS (OR 2.46 95% CI 1.43-4.25) and aortoiliac interventions (OR 2.91, 95% CI 1.09-7.75) were independent predictors of patency. Treatment modalities such as atherectomy, stenting or balloon angioplasty did not significantly impact patency at 1-year.

CONCLUSIONS

IVUS during lower extremity PVI is associated with improved 1-year patency, when compared to angiography alone. Certain subgroups, such as CLTI patients, lesions>15 cm, and TASC C or D lesions might benefit from adjunctive use of IVUS.

Intravascular Ultrasound during Endovascular Intervention for Peripheral Artery Disease, by Severity, Location, Device, and Procedure

There is limited evidence for the role of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients who underwent peripheral vascular intervention (PVI). We conducted retrospective cohort study utilizing the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality National Readmission database to delineate outcomes in IVUS-guided PVI versus non-IVUS-guided PVI. The present study utilized National Readmission database between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. We identified patients who underwent endovascular intervention for peripheral artery disease using relevant International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Procedural Coding System. The cohort was divided based on the use of IVUS during the procedure. The primary outcome was major amputation at 6 months after index hospitalization. Measured confounders were matched using propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighing method. We further performed a subgroup analysis based on disease severity, location of intervention, device, and procedure. A total of 434,901 hospitalizations were included in the present analysis. PVI with IVUS compared with no IVUS had similar risk of amputation at 6 months (195 of 8,939 [2.17%] vs 10,404 of 384,003 [2.71%]), hazard ratio 0.98, CI 0.77 to 1.25. Further, there was no difference in the rates of secondary outcomes. On subgroup analysis, amputation rates were significantly lower in patients with rest pain, in iliac intervention, or patients who underwent drug-eluting stent implantation with the use of IVUS compared with no IVUS. This nationwide observational study showed that there was no difference in major amputation rates with the use of IVUS in patients who underwent PVI. However, in subgroup of patients with rest pain, iliac intervention or drug-eluting stent implantation IVUS use was associated with significantly lower major amputation rates.

The mid-term effect of intravascular ultrasound on endovascular interventions for lower extremity peripheral arterial disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is an important adjunctive tool for patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD) undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT). The evidence regarding the advantages of IVUS use is evolving, and recent studies have reported conflicting results. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of IVUS during angiography-guided EVT for patients with PAD.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through April 2023 to identify studies that investigated the outcomes of IVUS with angiography-guided EVT vs angiography-alone-guided EVT. The primary outcome was restenosis/occlusion rate; secondary outcomes were target lesion revascularization, major amputation, and mortality.

RESULTS

One randomized controlled trial and 14 observational studies, largely of moderate quality, were included, yielding a total of 708,808 patients with 709,189 lesions that were treated with IVUS-guided EVT (n = 101,405) vs angiography-alone (n = 607,784). Compared with angiography alone, IVUS-guided EVT was associated with a non-significant trend towards decreased restenosis/occlusion (relative risk [RR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.00; I2 = 60%). Although the risk of target lesion revascularization and mortality were comparable (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.65-1.10; I2 = 70%; RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.28; I2 = 43%, respectively), the use of IVUS was also associated with significantly lower risk of major amputation (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.67-0.82; I2 = 47%). Subgroup analysis focusing on femoropopliteal disease demonstrated significantly higher patency (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-0.98; I2 = 73%). However, superiority with major amputation was not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

IVUS-guided EVT for PAD may possibly be associated with a lower major amputation rate compared with angiography alone-guided EVT, although the difference in patency remained an insignificant trend in favor of IVUS-guided EVT. Adjunctive use of IVUS during EVT may be beneficial, and further prospective studies are warranted to delineate this relationship and the applicability of this technology in routine practice.

Intravascular Ultrasound Use in Peripheral Arterial and Deep Venous Interventions: Multidisciplinary Expert Opinion From SCAI/AVF/AVLS/SIR/SVM/SVS

Percutaneous revascularization is the primary strategy for treating lower extremity venous and arterial disease. Angiography is limited by its ability to accurately size vessels, precisely determine the degree of stenosis and length of lesions, characterize lesion morphology, or correctly diagnose postintervention complications. These limitations are overcome with use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). IVUS has demonstrated the ability to improve outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention, and there is increasing evidence to support its benefits in the setting of peripheral vascular intervention. At this stage in its evolution, there remains a need to standardize the use and approach to peripheral vascular IVUS imaging. This manuscript represents considerations and consensus perspectives that emerged from a roundtable discussion including 15 physicians with expertise in interventional cardiology, interventional radiology, and vascular surgery, representing 6 cardiovascular specialty societies, held on February 3, 2023. The roundtable's aims were to assess the current state of lower extremity revascularization, identify knowledge gaps and need for evidence, and determine how IVUS can improve care and outcomes for patients with peripheral arterial and deep venous pathology.

Intravascular Ultrasound Use in Peripheral Arterial and Deep Venous Interventions: Multidisciplinary Expert Opinion From SCAI/AVF/AVLS/SIR/SVM/SVS

Percutaneous revascularization is the primary strategy for treating lower extremity venous and arterial disease. Angiography is limited by its ability to accurately size vessels, precisely determine the degree of stenosis and length of lesions, characterize lesion morphology, or correctly diagnose postintervention complications. These limitations are overcome with use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). IVUS has demonstrated the ability to improve outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention, and there is increasing evidence to support its benefits in the setting of peripheral vascular intervention. At this stage in its evolution, there remains a need to standardize the use and approach to peripheral vascular IVUS imaging. This manuscript represents considerations and consensus perspectives that emerged from a roundtable discussion including 15 physicians with expertise in interventional cardiology, interventional radiology, and vascular surgery, representing 6 cardiovascular specialty societies, held on February 3, 2023. The roundtable's aims were to assess the current state of lower extremity revascularization, identify knowledge gaps and need for evidence, and determine how IVUS can improve care and outcomes for patients with peripheral arterial and deep venous pathology.

Advanced Endovascular Techniques for Limb Salvage

As the number of patients affected by peripheral arterial disease continues to increase, new technical approaches and devices have been developed to provide effective and durable treatment options that will lead to improved outcomes. While the mainstay of endovascular intervention remains mostly balloon-based, several innovative techniques and technologies are in development that may provide new solutions. This review highlights recent endovascular advancements in the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia and additional adjunctive devices that are needed to improve lesion patency, reduce the need for reintervention, and lead to better patient-centered functional outcomes.

Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance During Peripheral Vascular Interventions: Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Costs From the Japanese Perspective

PURPOSE

The value of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during peripheral vascular revascularization procedures is incompletely understood. Moreover, data on long-term clinical outcomes and costs are limited. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes and costs between IVUS and contrast angiography alone in patients undergoing peripheral revascularization procedures in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective comparative analysis was performed using the Japanese Medical Data Vision insurance claims database. All patients undergoing revascularization for peripheral artery disease (PAD) between April 2009 and July 2019 were included. Patients were followed until July 2020, death, or a subsequent revascularization procedure for PAD. Two patient groups were compared: one undergoing IVUS imaging or the other contrast angiography alone. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac and limb events, including all-cause-mortality, endovascular thrombolysis, subsequent revascularization procedures for PAD, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, and major amputations. Total health care costs were documented over the follow-up and compared between groups, using a bootstrap method.

RESULTS

The study included 3956 patients in the IVUS group and 5889 in the angiography alone group. Intravascular ultrasound was significantly associated with reduced risk of a subsequent revascularization procedure (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.25 [0.22-0.28]) and major adverse cardiac and limb events (0.69 [0.65-0.73]). The total costs were significantly lower in the IVUS group, with a mean cost saving over follow-up of $18 173 [$7 695-$28 595] per patient.

CONCLUSION

The use of IVUS during peripheral revascularization provides superior long-term clinical outcomes at lower costs compared with contrast angiography alone, warranting wider adoption and fewer barriers to IVUS reimbursement for patients with PAD undergoing routine revascularization.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during peripheral vascular revascularization has been introduced to improve the precision of the procedure. However, questions over the benefit of IVUS in terms of long-term clinical outcome and over cost have limited its use in everyday clinical practice. This study, performed in a Japanese health insurance claims database, demonstrates that use of IVUS provides a superior clinical outcome over the long term at a lower cost compared to angiography alone. These findings should encourage clinicians to use IVUS in routine peripheral vascular revascularization procedures and encourage providers to reduce barriers to use.

Trends and outcomes associated with intravascular ultrasound use during femoropopliteal revascularization in the Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use in lower extremity interventions is growing in popularity owing to its imaging in the axial plane, superior detail in imaging lesion characteristics, and its enhanced ability to delineate lesion severity and extent compared with catheter angiograms. However, there are conflicting data regarding whether IVUS affects outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect associated with IVUS implementation in femoropopliteal interventions.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used Vascular Quality Initiative data. Patients undergoing an index endovascular femoropopliteal revascularization from 2016 to 2021 were included. Patients were differentiated by whether or not IVUS was used to assess the femoropopliteal segment during intervention (no IVUS, IVUS). Propensity score matching, based on preoperative demographics and measures of disease severity was used. Primary outcomes were major amputation-free survival (AFS), femoropopliteal reintervention-free survival (RFS), and primarily patent survival (PPS) at 12 months.

RESULTS

IVUS use grew steadily throughout the study period, comprising 0.6% of interventions in 2016 and increasing to 8.2% of interventions by 2021; growth was most dramatic in ambulatory surgical center or office-based laboratory settings where IVUS use grew from 4.4% to 43% to 47% of interventions. In unmatched cohorts, patients receiving interventions using IVUS tended to have lower prevalence of multiple cardiovascular comorbidities (eg, congestive heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, and dialysis dependence) and presented more often with claudication and less often with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Intraoperatively, IVUS was used more often in complex femoropopliteal lesions (Transatlantic Intersociety grade D vs A), and more often in conjunction with stenting and/or atherectomy. IVUS use was associated with improved AFS, but similar RFS and PPS at 12 months. However, in multivariable analysis IVUS was not associated with any of the primary outcomes independently; rather, all outcomes were influenced primarily by CLTI, dialysis dependence, and prior major amputation status; technical outcomes (ie, RFS and PPS loss) were further driven by complexity of lesion (worse in Transatlantic Intersociety grade D vs A lesions) and treatment setting (ie, ambulatory surgical center or office-based laboratory setting associated with increased hazard for RFS and PPS loss).

CONCLUSIONS

IVUS implementation in femoropopliteal interventions is growing, with rapid adoption among interventions in ambulatory surgical centers and office-based laboratories. IVUS was not associated with an effect on technical outcomes at 12 months; improvement in major AFS was observed; however, multivariable analysis suggests this finding may be an effect of confounding by multiple factors highly associated with IVUS use, namely, in patients with lower prevalence of CLTI, dialysis dependence, and prior major amputations, thus conveying baseline lower risk for major amputation and death.

Amputation After Endovascular Therapy With and Without Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance: A Nationwide Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) provides precise intravascular information during endovascular therapy (EVT). However, the clinical efficacy of IVUS in patients who undergo EVT remains unknown. The present study aimed to determine whether the use of IVUS-guided EVT is associated with better clinical outcomes in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination administrative inpatient database from April 2014 to March 2019, we identified patients diagnosed with atherosclerosis of arteries of extremities and underwent EVT (percutaneous endovascular transluminal angioplasty and thrombectomy for extremities or percutaneous endovascular removal). Propensity score matching analysis was performed to compare outcomes between the patients who underwent IVUS on the same day as the first EVT intervention (IVUS group) and the others (non-IVUS group). The primary outcome was major and minor amputation for extremities within 12 months of the first EVT procedure. Secondary outcomes were bypass surgery, stent grafting, reintervention, all-cause death, readmission, and total hospitalization costs within 12 months of the first EVT procedure.

RESULTS

Among 85 649 eligible patients, 50 925 (59.5%) were IVUS group. After propensity score matching, the IVUS group had significantly lower incidence of 12-month amputation compared with the non-IVUS group (6.9% in the IVUS group versus 9.3% in the non-IVUS group; hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.72-0.89]). Compared with the non-IVUS group, the IVUS group showed a lower risk of bypass surgery and stent grafting and decreased total hospitalization costs, while a higher risk of reintervention and readmission. No significant differences in all-cause death were found between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective study, IVUS-guided EVT was associated with a lower amputation risk than non-IVUS-guided EVT. Our findings should be interpreted carefully because of the limitations of an observational study using administrative data. Further studies are warranted to confirm whether IVUS-guided EVT leads to decreased amputations.

Temporal Trends, Practice Variation, and Associated Outcomes With IVUS Use During Peripheral Arterial Intervention

BACKGROUND

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been shown in limited prospective studies to improve procedural outcomes for patients undergoing lower extremity peripheral arterial intervention (PVI).

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to study temporal trends, practice variation, and associated outcomes with the use of IVUS during PVI among Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

All PVIs performed from 2016 to 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries aged >65 years were included. Temporal trends in IVUS use were stratified by procedural location (inpatient, outpatient, or ambulatory surgery center [ASC]/office-based laboratory [OBL]) and physician specialty. The primary outcome was major adverse limb events (MALE). Inverse probability weighting was used to account for differences in baseline characteristics. Cox regression with competing risks was used to estimate weighted hazard ratios.

RESULTS

During the study period, 543,488 PVIs were included, of which 63,372 (11.7%) used IVUS. A substantial growth in IVUS use was observed, which was driven by procedures performed in ASCs/OBLs (23.6% increase from quarter 1 of 2016 through quarter 4 of 2019). Among operators who used IVUS, there was also notable variation in use (median operator use 5.4% of cases; IQR: 2.2%-15.0%; range, <1%-100%). In weighted analysis, IVUS use during PVI was associated with a lower risk of MALE through a median of 514 days (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.70-0.75; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In contemporary nationwide data, IVUS use during PVI has increased since 2016, driven by growth in the ASC/OBL setting. However, there remains substantial variation in operator practice. When used during PVI, IVUS was associated with a lower risk of short- and long-term MALE.

Intravascular ultrasound guidance for lower extremity arterial and venous interventions

This review details the utility of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) for the management of peripheral artery and venous disease. The purpose of this document is to provide an update in the use of IVUS in peripheral arterial and venous pathology and demonstrate the use of IVUS as a practical diagnostic imaging procedure to evaluate and treat peripheral vascular disorders. IVUS, a diagnostic tool that relies on sound waves to produce precise images of the vessel being evaluated, was originally introduced to the medical community for the purposes of peripheral artery imaging, though it was quickly adapted for coronary interventions with positive outcomes. The utility of IVUS includes vessel measurement, pre- and post-procedural planning, treatment optimisation, and detection of thrombus, dissection or calcium severity. While angiography remains the standard imaging approach during peripheral intervention, multiple observational studies and small prospective trials have shown that in comparison, IVUS provides more accurate imaging detail, which may improve procedural outcomes. IVUS can also address limitations of angiography, including the need to administer contrast medium and eliminate the ambiguity associated with other forms of imaging. This review provides contemporary examples of where IVUS is being used during peripheral intervention as well as representative imaging to serve as a resource for the practising clinician.

Appropriate Use of Intravascular Ultrasound During Arterial and Venous Lower Extremity Interventions

BACKGROUND

There has been growing use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) during lower extremity arterial and venous revascularization. Observational data suggest that the use of IVUS can improve periprocedural and long-term outcomes, but largescale prospective data remain limited. Consensus opinion regarding the appropriate use of IVUS during peripheral intervention is needed.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this consensus document is to provide guidance on the appropriate use of IVUS in various phases of peripheral arterial and venous interventions.

METHODS

A 12-member writing committee was convened to derive consensus regarding the appropriate clinical scenarios for use of peripheral IVUS. The group iteratively created a 72-question survey representing 12 lower extremity arterial interventional scenarios. Separately, a 40-question survey representing 8 iliofemoral venous interventional scenarios was constructed. Clinical scenarios were categorized by interventional phases: preintervention, intraprocedure, and postintervention optimization. Thirty international vascular experts (15 for each survey) anonymously completed the survey instrument. Results were categorized by appropriateness using the median value and disseminated to the voting panel to reevaluate for any disagreement.

RESULTS

Consensus opinion concluded that IVUS use may be appropriate during the preintervention phase for evaluating the etiology of vessel occlusion and plaque morphology in the iliac and femoropopliteal arteries. IVUS was otherwise rated as appropriate during iliac and femoropopliteal revascularization in most other preintervention scenarios, as well as intraprocedural and postprocedural optimization phases. IVUS was rated appropriate in all interventional phases for the tibial arteries. For iliofemoral venous interventions, IVUS was rated as appropriate in all interventional phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Expert consensus can help define clinical procedural scenarios in which peripheral IVUS may have value during lower extremity arterial and venous intervention while additional prospective data are collected.

How Much Debulking with Atherectomy is Enough When Treating Infrainguinal Arterial Interventions? The Balance Between Residual Stenosis and Adventitial Injury

Atherectomy is an effective vessel prepping device but not all atherectomy devices are equal. The depth of vessel injury and residual narrowing vary considerably among atherectomy devices with significant implications on outcome. Precision imaging is critical to optimize outcome using atherectomy as a vessel prepping technique. Prospective trials need to test the hypothesis that precision imaging has a significant impact on how operators approach the treatment of infrainguinal arterial disease.

Intravascular ultrasound for endovascular precision in pediatrics

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is used as a diagnostic adjunct to angiography and has become a valuable diagnostic and interventional tool with a well-documented safety profile. The American College of Cardiology and the European Society of Cardiology have published guidelines regarding the use of IVUS in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention. IVUS has gained popularity in the interventional radiology (IR) community in recent years; however, there are no consensus guidelines for utilization. Furthermore, IVUS remains an infrequently used modality in pediatric IR, likely because of unfamiliarity with the equipment and techniques, as well as concerns over the compatibility of these instruments with pediatric anatomy. IVUS can be safely used as a helpful and sometimes necessary tool for pediatric interventions in appropriately selected patients. The utility of IVUS for reducing both fluoroscopy time and contrast agent volume makes it particularly valuable in pediatric practice. This article presents an overview of both the rotational and phased-array IVUS types and an in-depth discussion on the most common applications of these techniques in the pediatric setting across multiple procedure categories.

Use of Intravascular Ultrasound During First-Time Femoropopliteal Peripheral Vascular Interventions Among Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) may be a useful adjunct to lower extremity peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) in certain clinical scenarios. We aimed to identify patient- and physician-level characteristics associated with the use of IVUS during first-time femoropopliteal PVI.

METHODS

We included all Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective femoropopliteal PVI for claudication or chronic limb-threatening ischemia between 01/01/2019 and 12/31/2019. We excluded patients with prior open or endovascular femoropopliteal intervention and all physicians performing ≤10 PVI during the study period. We calculated the proportion of patients who had IVUS performed as part of their index PVI for each physician. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to evaluate patient- and physician-level factors associated with use of IVUS.

RESULTS

We identified 58,552 patients who underwent index femoropopliteal PVI, of whom 11,394 (19%) received IVUS. A total of 1,628 physicians performed >10 procedures during the study period, with IVUS utilization ranging from 0-100%. After hierarchical regression, claudication (versus chronic limb-threatening ischemia: OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11-1.36), stenting (versus angioplasty alone: OR 1.57, 1.33-1.86) and atherectomy (versus angioplasty alone: OR 2.09, 1.83-2.39) were associated with higher odds of IVUS utilization. Higher-volume providers (tertile 3 vs. tertile 1: OR 3.78, 2.43-5.90) and those with high rates of service provided in an office-based laboratory (tertile 3 vs. tertile 1: OR 10.72, 6.78-19.93) were more likely to utilize IVUS. Radiologists (OR 11.23, 5.96-21.17) and cardiologists (OR 1.97, 1.32-2.93) used IVUS more frequently than vascular surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variability exists in the use of IVUS for first-time femoropopliteal PVI. The association of IVUS with claudication, atherectomy, and office-based laboratories raises concern about its potential overuse by some physicians.

Removal of Partially Deployed Supera Stents: Case-Based Review and Technical Considerations

PURPOSE

Maldeployment of the Supera stent system can result in primary technical failure, inferior primary patency, and poorer patient outcomes. The purpose of this article is to present a case series illustrating the conditions required to perform optimal stent deployment, and if necessary, undertake successful stent removal following maldeployment.

TECHNIQUE

Two key failures of effective Supera deployment are elongation and invagination. Several technical factors should be considered to reduce the risk of maldeployment: aggressive target vessel predilation, the use of multiple fluoroscopic views, slow deployment with controlled forward pressure applied on the delivery device, "sandwich packing" of the stent above and below target lesions, and the "pulling back" of invagination. To successfully retrieve a partially deployed stent, 3 factors should be considered: the percentage of the stent already deployed, the distance from the distal tip of the introducing sheath to the proximal extent of the deployed stent, and the severity of proximal vessel disease. The higher these factors, the greater the risk of stent detachment and failed retrieval.

CONCLUSION

In this series of 6 cases of maldeployment, the removal of a partially deployed Supera stent appeared to be feasible and safe, with success dependent on selected technical and anatomical considerations.

Predictability and usefulness of intravascular ultrasound-guided angioplasty in patients with femoropopliteal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To assess whether intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided angioplasty in femoropopliteal lesions would improve clinical outcomes and predict restenosis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Studies in which IVUS-guided angioplasty was used for femoropopliteal lesions were searched from the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases; articles with the full text were included. The primary endpoint of this study was primary patency at 12 months, while the secondary endpoints were primary patency at 24 months, freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months, and correlation of restenosis with the distal external elastic membrane (EEM) area, post-intervention minimum lumen area, lesion length, dissection, and calcification.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Altogether, 11 observational studies involving 1521 patients (1703 lesions) were analyzed. The quality of the evidence for 7 main outcomes was assessed as "very low" by The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) classification. The mean follow-up period was 1.5 years. The pooled rates were: 78% for 12-month primary patency (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.83), 74.3% for 24-month primary patency (95% CI, 0.71-0.78), and 80% for 12-month freedom from TLR (95% CI, 0.74-0.86). The 12-month primary patency of IVUS use (relative risk [RR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.48-2.74) was higher compared to non-IVUS use. The minimum lumen (stent) area (standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.30; 95% CI, -0.46 to -0.15) and dissection (OR 1.58; 95% CI, 1.01-2.49, P = 0.047), were associated with midterm patency in terms of restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In IVUS-guided angioplasty in patients with femoropopliteal lesions, the minimum lumen (stent) area and dissection were associated with restenosis. Nevertheless, there is limited and heterogeneous evidence regarding the usefulness and Predictability of IVUS in patients with peripheral arterial disease in the femoropopliteal artery, especially in long-term patency and as a predictor of declining patency. The optimal role of IVUS in such patients should be elucidated in the future.

[Innovations in the endovascular treatment of peripheral arterial disease]

The cooperation of physicians, engineers and other sciences results in a steady launching of effective tools for vascular treatment, which further support the dominating position of endovascular therapy in the field of PAD. Parallel to the treatment options, non-radiation based image guidance is another area, where innovation helps to reduce radiation burden for patient and staff members without losing procedural quality and despite a growing number of radiation based procedures. Meanwhile, the available portfolio of endovascular tools allows to treat every vessel segment with results comparable to or even better then open surgery. This survey presents new techniques, tools and recently published results from related trials, which will probably have further influence on PAD treatment in the coming years.

Intravascular ultrasound-supported percutaneous angioplasty of post-kidney transplant renal artery bifurcation stenosis

BACKGROUND

Transplant renal artery stenosis (TRAS) is an uncommon complication following renal transplantation. Its usual clinical presentation includes worsening hypertension and/or renal function, without any evidence of graft rejection. Bifurcation renal artery stenosis of the transplanted renal artery is rarely encountered.

METHODS

Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) with or without stenting is the procedure of choice to treat TRAS. We hereby describe a patient, who presented with impaired renal functions, four months following the renal transplantation. He underwent intravascular ultrasound-guided PTRA of the bifurcation lesion of TRAS.Results and conclusion: Superior renal artery had coronary drug-eluting stent implantation, while inferior renal artery and side branch of the superior renal artery had balloon angioplasty, alone. Post-intervention, the raised serum creatinine level decreased from 2.9 mg% to 1.7 mg%. The index case described the successful PTRA and stenting of the bifurcation lesion of TRAS, the technical results of which was optimized with the use of intravascular ultrasound.