Five-Year Irish Trial of CLI Patients With TASC II Type C/D Lesions Undergoing Subintimal Angioplasty or Bypass Surgery Based on Plaque Echolucency

Objective Outcome Measures for Trials in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Across 2 Decades: Analysis and Recommendations

Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is prevalent and associated with morbidity and mortality. The published research concerning CLTI therapeutics is evolving. The goals of this review are to: 1) summarize the endpoints that are being used in trials assessing interventions for patients with CLTI; and 2) review gaps and discrepancies in current outcome definitions. A search was conducted of the PubMed database and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify studies published between January 2000 and March 2020 that evaluated treatment options for patients with CLTI. Meta-analyses, case series, case reports, abstracts, and expert opinion were excluded. Forty-nine studies (n = 11,667) were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most trials reported clinical outcomes (mortality, 69.4%; limb events, 87.8%; target lesion revascularization, 83.7%). Mean follow-up duration was 23.7 months. In investigational device exemption trials, total follow-up and follow-up to primary outcomes were discordant (12 months vs 6 months; P = 0.0018). Hemodynamic testing was reported in 71.4%, usually ankle-brachial index. Patency was assessed in 89.8% of trials; ultrasound was used in 65.3% and invasive angiography in 85.7%, at baseline and/or during follow-up. Wound assessment was performed in 49.0% of studies, qualitative in 28.6% and quantitative in 20.4%. Finally, quality of life assessment was performed in 55% of studies. Definitions for many outcomes varied across studies. Consensus regarding which outcomes to study, uniform definitions, and optimal methods to measure some of these outcomes are yet to be established. A comprehensive effort by all stakeholders is needed to move the field of CLTI forward.

Clinical Effectiveness and Resource Utilization of Surgery versus Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia

BACKGROUND

The clinical effectiveness of surgical versus endovascular therapy for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) continues to be debated, and the resources required for each therapy are unclear.

METHODS

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing surgery with endovascular therapy for CLTI, which reported clinical effectiveness and resource utilization. Short-term and long-term clinical outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

The search yielded 4,231 titles, of which 17 publications met our inclusion criteria. Five publications were all from 1 RCT, and 12 publications were observational studies. In the RCT, the surgical approach had greater resource use in the first year (total hospital days across all admissions for surgery versus angioplasty: 46.14 ± 53.87 vs. 36.35 ± 51.39; P < 0.001; also true for days in high-dependency and intensive therapy units), but differences were not statistically significant in subsequent years. All-cause mortality presented a nonsignificant difference favoring angioplasty in the first 2 years (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.75-2.15), but after 2 years, it favored surgical treatment (aHR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.71). The observational studies reported short-term effectiveness and resource utilization favoring endovascular therapy, but most differences were not statistically significant. Long-term outcomes were more mixed; in particular, mortality outcomes generally favored surgery, although concluding that cause and effect is not possible as endovascularly treated patients tended to be older and may have had a shorter life expectancy regardless of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical effectiveness and resource utilization of surgery compared with endovascular therapy for CLTI is not known with certainty and will not be known until ongoing trials report results. It is likely that findings will vary by the time horizon, where initial outcomes and utilization tend to favor endovascular interventions, but long-term outcomes favor surgical revascularization.

Percutaneous Vascular Interventions Versus Bypass Surgeries in Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to compare percutaneous vascular interventions (PVI) versus bypass surgeries (BSX) in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI).

BACKGROUND

Previous relevant reviews with limited numbers of included studies did not strictly confine the inclusion criteria to CLI, also involving patients with severe claudication, which may introduce bias in the decision-making of CLI revascularization. Current treatment strategies for CLI still remain controversial.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials and observational clinical studies comparing PVI with BSX in CLI patients. Primary endpoints included overall survival, amputation-free survival, 30-day mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events.

RESULTS

We identified 45 cohorts and 1 RCT in over 20,903 patients. In overall population, PVI reduced the risks of 30-day mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.95), major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.61), and surgical site infection (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.19-0.51), but increased the risks of long-term all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.16, 95% CI 1.05-1.27) and primary patency failure (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.08-1.58). When compared with autogenous BSX, PVI was also associated with additional increased risks of long-term death or amputation (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.02-1.94) and secondary patency failure (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.17-1.95). In patients with infrapopliteal lesions, we found PVI had inferior primary patency (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.10-1.75) compared with BSX.

CONCLUSION

For patients in good physical condition with long life-expectancy, BSX may represent a better choice compared with PVI, particularly when autogenous bypass is available. While enhanced perioperative care for cardiovascular events and surgical site should be considered in patients underwent BSX to achieve comparable short-term outcomes provided by PVI.

Long-Term Limb Salvage and Amputation-Free Survival After Femoropopliteal Bypass and Femoropopliteal PTA for Critical Ischemia in a Clinical Cohort

Objective:

This population-based retrospective cohort study investigates long-term results of femoropopliteal bypass and femoropopliteal endovascular intervention (PTA) in patients with critical ischemia, with focus on limb salvage and amputation-free survival.

Methods:

All patients who underwent femoropopliteal bypass or femoropopliteal PTA for critical ischemia without other simultaneous intervention between 1999 and 2013 were included. Stratification was according to treatment modality and symptoms, rest pain, or ischemic ulcer/gangrene. We assessed technical success, 30-day complications, length of stay, recurrent interventions, limb salvage, survival, and amputation-free survival in all patients.

Results:

We identified 292 operations in 264 patients, 140 bypass and 152 PTA. In 32 PTA cases, the patients were explicitly deemed unfit for bypass surgery. This group had significantly inferior technical success and limb salvage ( P = .00). In other patients, technical success was 96% for bypass and 93% for PTA, while limb salvage after 5 years was 78% for bypass and 81% for PTA. Reoperation for local complications was performed in 16% after bypass and 2% after PTA ( P = .00). Mean length of stay was 8 days after bypass and 1.9 days after PTA ( P = .00).

Conclusions:

Long-term follow-up showed similar technical success and good limb salvage for both PTA and bypass patients in this clinical cohort. Patients who were unfit for bypass surgery had significantly inferior technical success and limb salvage. PTA was associated with shorter hospital stay and fewer reoperations for local complications. The findings support a PTA first strategy in all cases where technical success is likely.

Cost Analysis of Initial Treatment With Endovascular Revascularization, Open Surgery, or Primary Major Amputation in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease

Purpose: To compare the total initial treatment costs for open surgery, endovascular revascularization, and primary major amputation within a single-payer healthcare system. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective analysis was undertaken to evaluate 1138 patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) who underwent 1017 endovascular procedures, 86 open surgeries, and 35 major amputations between 2013 and 2016. A cost-mix analysis was performed on individual patient data generated for selected diagnosis-related groups. Mean costs are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: There was no intergroup difference in demographics or private health insurance status. However, the amputation group had a higher proportion of emergency procedures (68.6% vs 13.3% vs 27.9%, p<0.001) and critical limb ischemia (88.6% vs 35.9% vs 37.2%, p<0.001) compared with the endovascular therapy and open surgery groups, respectively. The endovascular revascularization group spent less time in hospital and used fewer intensive care unit (ICU) resources compared with the open surgery and major amputation groups (hospital length of stay: 3.4 vs 10.0 vs 20.2 days, p<0.01; ICU: 2.4 vs 22.6 vs 54.6 hours, p<0.01), respectively. While mean prosthetic and device costs were higher in the endovascular group [AUD$2770 vs AUD$1658 (open) and AUD$1219 (amputation), p<0.01], substantial disparities were observed in costs associated with longer operating theater times, length of stay, and ICU utilization, which resulted in significantly higher costs in the open and amputation groups. After adjusting for confounders, the AUD$18,396 (95% CI AUD$16,436 to AUD$20,356) mean cost per admission for the endovascular revascularization group was significantly less (p<0.001) than the open surgery (AUD$31,908, 95% CI AUD$28,285 to AUD$35,530) and major amputation groups (AUD$43,033, 95% CI AUD$37,706 to AUD$48,361). Conclusion: Endovascular revascularization procedures for PAD cost the health payer less compared with open surgery and primary amputation. While devices used to deliver contemporary endovascular therapy are more expensive, the reduction in bed days, ICU utilization, and related hospital resources results in a significantly lower mean total cost per admission for the initial treatment.

Subintimal angioplasty for lower limb arterial chronic total occlusions

BACKGROUND

In recent years subintimal angioplasty (SIA) has become an established percutaneous procedure for the treatment of symptomatic lower limb arterial chronic total occlusions. However, the clinical benefits of this practice remain unclear. The aim of the review was to determine the effectiveness of SIA on clinical outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of SIA versus other treatment for people with lower limb arterial chronic total occlusions, determined by the effects on clinical improvement, technical success rate, patency rate, limb salvage rate, and morbidity rates.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register (last searched January 2016) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 12). We also searched clinical trials registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included data from randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of SIA and any other management method in the treatment of lower limb arterial chronic total occlusions. The primary intervention of interest was SIA, with or without a stent, for the restoration of vessel patency in people with occlusions of a lower limb artery. We compared SIA against alternative modalities used to restore vessel patency, including conventional percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, surgical bypass, or any other treatments. We compared different SIA devices and techniques against each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality, and extracted data. The third review author resolved disagreements.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies, involving a total of 147 participants with TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC)-II D femoropopliteal lesions, met our inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Both studies were small but otherwise of high methodological quality. However, the treatment techniques and control groups of the two studies differed, precluding the combining of study results and resulting in the evidence being less applicable. We therefore considered the quality of the evidence to be low.In one study, participants with TASC-II D lesions were randomized to receive either SIA with stenting of the superficial femoral artery or remote endarterectomy (RE) with stenting of the superficial femoral artery. Three-year follow-up results showed a Rutherford classification improvement of 64% in the SIA group compared to 80% in the RE group (risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.03; 95 participants; P = 0.079). Postexercise ankle brachial index improvements (defined as an increased value of 0.2) were reported in 70% of participants in the SIA group compared to 82% in the RE group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; 95 participants; P = 0.18). The study reported the technical success rate was 93% for the SIA group and 96% for the RE group (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.07; 95 participants; P = 0.91). Primary patency at 12 months was 59.1% in the SIA group compared to 78.4% in the RE group (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.00; 95 participants; P = 0.05). Primary patency at 24 months was 56.8% in the SIA group compared to 76.5% in the RE group (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.00; 95 participants; P = 0.05) and 47.7% in the SIA group and 62.7% in the RE group at 36 months (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.11; 95 participants; P = 0.15). Assisted primary patency was 52.3% in the SIA group compared to 70.6% in the RE group (P = 0.01) at 36 months. Secondary patency was better for the RE group (P = 0.03) at 36 months. Limb salvage at three years' follow-up was 95% in the SIA group and 98% in the RE group (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05; 95 participants; P = 0.4). There were no perioperative deaths, but complications occurred in two SIA participants (femoral pseudoaneurysm and pulmonary edema) and in three RE participants (seroma, femoral pseudoaneurysm, superficial femoral artery acute occlusion).In the second study, the effects of the SIA OUTBACK re-entry catheter device in people affected by TASC-II D superficial femoral artery chronic total occlusion were compared with the SIA manual re-entry technique. This study did not report clinical improvement and limb salvage. Technical success was achieved in all cases in both the OUTBACK device and manual groups. The primary 6-month patency rate was 100% in the OUTBACK group (26 of 26 participants) compared to 96.2% in the manual group (25 of 26 participants) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.15). The primary 12-month patency rate was 92.3% in the OUTBACK group (24 of 26 participants) compared to 84.6% in the manual group (22 of 26 participants) (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.33). Patency rates at 24 and 36 months were not reported. The study reported that there were no complications.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Using the GRADE approach, we classified the quality of the evidence presented by both studies in this review as low due to small study size and the small number of studies. In addition, the two included trials differed from each other in the techniques and control used, and we were therefore unable to combine the data. Consequently there is currently insufficient evidence to support SIA over other techniques. Evidence from more randomized controlled trials is needed to assess the role of SIA in people with chronic lower limb arterial total occlusions.

Costs of Real-Life Endovascular Treatment of Critical Limb Ischemia: Report from Poland-A European Union Country with a Low-Budget Health Care System

BACKGROUND

To analyze the costs of inhospital, percutaneous treatment of patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) carried out in Poland, a European Union country with a low-budget national health system.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on all patients admitted to a tertiary care hospital for endovascular treatment of CLI over 1 year.

SETTING

A single, large volume, tertiary angiology center located in Southern Poland.

PARTICIPANTS

CLI patients due to aortoiliac, femoropopliteal, or infrapopliteal arterial stenoses or occlusions with indications for first-line endovascular therapy or similar patients who refused open surgical procedure despite having primary indications for vascular surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Direct stenting using bare-metal stents was the primary mode of treatment for lesions located within the aortoiliac and femoropopliteal arterial segments. Plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) was the second most commonly used technique. For below-the-knee arteries, POBA was the mainstay of treatment, which was occasionally supported by drug-eluting stent angioplasty. Directional atherectomy, scoring balloon angioplasty, or local fibrinolysis was used infrequently. Drug-eluting balloon percutaneous transluminal angioplasty was not used.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were the mean reimbursement of costs provided by the Polish National Health Fund (NHF) for inhospital treatment of patients for whom endovascular procedures were performed as initial treatment for CLI and the inhospital costs of endovascular treatment calculated by the caregiver in the 2 years since the first procedure. The average total number of days spent in hospital, amputation-free survival (AFS), overall survival (OS), and limb salvage rate (LSR) according to a life-table method were also calculated for the 2 years.

RESULTS

In the first year, there were 496 endovascular and 15 surgical hospitalizations for revascularization procedures to treat 340 limbs in 327 patients, with a further 53 revascularization procedures in the second year. There were an additional 90 hospitalizations over the first year and 38 over the second year for CLI-associated cardiovascular comorbidities. The mean reimbursement for hospitalizations of patients included into observation, provided by the NHF, was $4901.94 per patient for the first year and $833.57 per patient alive to the second year. The mean cost of hospitalization for percutaneous revascularization treatment was $3804.25 per patient for the first year and $3340.30 per patient requiring revascularization within the second year. All costs were calculated in constant 2011 USD. The average total number of days spent in hospital was 8.4 days for the first year and 1.97 days per patient alive to the second year. At 1 and 2 years, the AFS was 76.8% and 66.6%, the OS was 86.5% and 77.3%, and the LSR was 89.4% and 86%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular therapy using the currently available techniques can be performed in almost all patients suffering from CLI at relatively low costs, and satisfactory results can be obtained. Physicians play a pivotal role in ensuring quality of treatment and the reduction of treatment cost in these patients.

Comparative effectiveness of endovascular and surgical revascularization for patients with peripheral artery disease and critical limb ischemia: systematic review of revascularization in critical limb ischemia

BACKGROUND

For patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), the optimal treatment to enhance limb preservation, prevent death, and improve functional status is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the comparative effectiveness of endovascular revascularization and surgical revascularization in patients with CLI.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant English-language studies published from January 1995 to August 2012. Two investigators screened each abstract and full-text article for inclusion, abstracted the data, and performed quality ratings and evidence grading. Random-effects models were used to compute summary estimates of effects, with endovascular treatment as the control group.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 23 studies, including 1 randomized controlled trial, which reported no difference in amputation-free survival at 3 years (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI 0.84-1.77) and all-cause mortality (OR 1.07, 0.73-1.56) between the 2 treatments. Meta-analysis of the observational studies showed a statistically nonsignificant reduction in all-cause mortality at 6 months (11 studies, OR 0.85, 0.57-1.27) and amputation-free survival at 1 year (2 studies, OR 0.76, 0.48-1.21) in patients treated with endovascular revascularization. There was no difference in overall death, amputation, or amputation-free survival at ≥2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The currently available literature suggests that there is no difference in clinical outcomes for patients with CLI treated with endovascular or surgical revascularization. There is a paucity of high-quality data available to guide clinical decision making, especially as it pertains to patient subgroups or anatomical considerations.

Safety and efficacy of periprocedural anticoagulation with enoxaparin in patients undergoing peripheral endovascular revascularization

BACKGROUND

Periprocedural anticoagulation is primarily used in endovascular procedures to prevent acute reocclusion of the target vessel, but periprocedural anticoagulation might also have an impact on long-term outcome. Consecutive bleeding events are feared complications. Despite changes in peripheral endovascular revascularizations (EVRs), the periprocedural management has remained unchanged for years. Unfractionated heparin is still the treatment of choice during and immediately after EVR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a prospective, single-center, open-label phase III study comparing 2 different regimes of enoxaparin peri-interventional to peripheral EVR stratified into low- and high-risk groups according to the acute and long-term reocclusion risk due to their vessel morphology. In both groups, 0.5 mg/kg of enoxaparin as a bolus was administered intravenously 10 to 15 minutes before the start of the procedure. In the low-risk group, 40 mg of enoxaparin were administered once daily for 7 days; whereas in the high-risk group, 1 mg/kg of enoxaparin was administered subcutaneously (sc) 2 times a day for 48 hours after the procedure and afterward 40 mg of enoxaparin was administered sc once daily for 5 days.

RESULTS

For the analysis of the per protocol population, 44 patients remained in the low-risk group and 140 in the high-risk group. Concerning the primary safety end point, a total of 25 (13.59%) bleeding events occurred until day 30; 5 (11.36%) of them in the low-risk group and 20 (14.29%) in the high-risk group (P = .809 for low vs high risk). None of the bleeding events observed were major according to Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction criteria. Concerning our primary efficacy end point, none of the patients showed an acute reocclusion classified as a significant decrease in ankle-brachial index (ABI) or elevated peak systolic velocity ratio confirmed by duplex sonography until day 30. Concerning the second end point of prevention of chronic reobstruction, at day 180 ABI has decreased in the low-risk group from mean 0.94 at day 30 to mean 0.89 and from 1.28 at day 30 to 0.85 after 6 months in the high-risk group. No significant reobstruction was found in the low-risk group, whereas 5 significant reobstruction events were objectified in the high-risk group, all of them in the femoropopliteal arterial segment at day 180.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that low-molecular-weight heparin either in a low-dose or high-dose regime during a peripheral EVR is safe concerning bleeding complications and acute reobstructions. The long-term follow-up showed no significant difference between our high- and low-risk groups concerning reobstruction. The periprocedural anticoagulation seems to have no influence on the long-term patency rate after peripheral EVR.

Isolated Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty of the Profunda Femoris Artery for Limb Ischemia

Objective:

To compare the outcome of endovascular profunda femoral artery revascularization (ePFR) with ePFR and concurrent endovascular femoropopliteal revascularization (eFPR).

Methods:

A retrospective review of the consecutive patients with PFA and femoropopliteal vaso-occulsive disease who underwent ePFR or ePFR + eFPR for severe limb ischemia was performed.

Results:

A total of 18 ePFRs and 26 ePFR + eFPRs were performed; 17 (94%) ePFRs and 22 (85%) ePFR + eFPRs were technically successful. The 12-month survival free from amputation and reintervention rates following isolated ePFR were 78% and 72%, respectively, and following ePFR + eFPR were 96% and 81%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the survival free from amputation ( P = .4) or reintervention ( P = .91) rates between the 2 groups.

Conclusion:

These contemporary data suggest isolated ePFRs and ePFR + eFPRs are associated with good and comparable early limb salvage rates.

Ten-year technical and clinical outcomes in TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II infrainguinal C/D lesions using duplex ultrasound arterial mapping as the sole imaging modality for critical lower limb ischemia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate duplex ultrasound arterial mapping (DUAM) as the sole imaging modality when planning for bypass surgery (BS) and endovascular revascularization (EvR) in patients with critical limb ischemia for TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) II C/D infrainguinal lesions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review evaluating the accuracy of DUAM as the sole imaging tool in determining patient suitability for BS vs EvR. Primary outcomes were the sensitivity and specificity of DUAM compared with intraoperative digital subtraction angiography. Secondary outcomes were procedural, hemodynamic, and clinical outcomes, amputation-free survival, and freedom from major adverse clinical events.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2012, a total of 4783 patients with peripheral arterial disease were referred, of whom 622 critical limb ischemia patients underwent revascularization for TASC C and D lesions (EvR: n = 423; BS: n = 199). Seventy-four percent of EvR and 82% of BS were performed for TASC D (P = .218). The DUAM showed sensitivity of 97% and specificity of 98% in identifying lesions requiring intervention. Of the 520 procedures performed with DUAM alone, there was no difference regarding the number of procedures performed for occlusive or de novo lesions (EvR: 65% and 71%; BS: 87% and 78%; P = .056). Immediate clinical improvement to the Rutherford category ≤3 was 96% for EvR and 97% for BS (P = .78). Hemodynamic success was 79% for EvR and 77% for BS (P = .72). Six-year freedom from binary restenosis was 71.6% for EvR and 67.4% for BS (P = .724). Six-year freedom from target lesion revascularization was 81.1% for EvR and 70.3% for BS (P = .3571). Six-year sustained clinical improvement was 79.5% for EvR and 66.7% for BS (P = .294). Six-year amputation-free survival was 77.2% for EvR and 74.6% for BS (P = .837). There was a significant difference in risk of major adverse clinical events between EvR and BS (51% vs 70%; P = .034). Only 16.4% of patients required magnetic resonance angiography, which tended to overestimate lesions with 84% agreement with intraoperative findings. Six-year binary restenosis was 71% for DUAM procedures compared with 55% for magnetic resonance angiography procedures (P = .001), which was solely based on the prospective modality.

CONCLUSIONS

The DUAM epitomizes a minimally invasive, economically proficient modality for road mapping procedural outcome in BS and EvR. It allows for high patient turnover with procedural and clinical success without compromising hemodynamic outcome. The DUAM is superior to other available modalities as the sole preoperative imaging tool in a successful limb salvage program.

Results With Viabahn-Assisted Subintimal Recanalization for TASC C and TASC D Superficial Femoral Artery Occlusive Disease

Objectives: Many investigators including TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) recommend against primary endovascular treatment for severe (TASC C and D) superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease. Vein bypass is preferable but may not be appropriate due to comorbidities or lack of suitable vein. This study reviews our results with Viabahn stent graft-assisted subintimal recanalization (VASIR) for TASC C and D SFA atherosclerosis. Methods: In all, 13 males and 14 females, mean age 72 ± 11 years underwent 28 VASIR for severe (TASC C 8 of 28, TASC D 20 of 28, and 5 of 28 no continuous infrapopliteal runoff artery) SFA disease. Indications were claudication (14 of 28 limbs), ischemic rest pain (6 of 28), and tissue loss (8 of 28). Viabahn stent graft-assisted subintimal recanalization was chosen instead of bypass due to comorbidities or lack of vein. Patients received aspirin and, if not already taking warfarin, they also received clopidogrel. Patients were examined with Ankle-brachial Index (ABI) and duplex scan at 1 month, then every 3 months after VASIR. Results Viabahn stent graft-assisted subintimal recanalization was technically successful in all. Ankle-brachial Index averaged 0.47 ± 0.17 preprocedure, 0.89 ± 0.20 postprocedure, and increased by 0.15 or more in every case. Median follow-up is 20 months. There were 3 perioperative (<30 days) and 7 later failures including revision prior to any thrombosis. One patient required amputation. Four have died, 2 with patent grafts, none from causes related to VASIR, all more than 30 days post-VASIR. Estimated 1-year primary and secondary patency were 70% ± 11% and 73% ± 10%. Failure was not significantly associated with indications, comorbidities, or runoff status. There was a clear distinction between patients with early failure and the rest of the patients. None of the 8 patients with failure in the first 8 months after surgery has a patent graft. However, of 17 grafts primarily patent at 8 months, only 2 have failed (1 thrombosed and 1 required preemptive balloon angioplasty). There was a strong trend toward better patency with 6 and 7 mm diameter compared to 5 mm diameter stent grafts. Furthermore, although warfarin was not prescribed as part of the protocol, no patient taking warfarin before and who resumed warfarin after VASIR (n = 4) suffered failure. Conclusions: Despite significant early failures, we found VASIR to be durable in those who did not have early failure. Viabahn stent graft-assisted subintimal recanalization is an acceptable alternative to vein bypass in selected patients with severe SFA disease. Smaller arterial or stent graft diameter may be associated with poorer results. Warfarin may be valuable to reduce the risk of failure after VASIR.