A systematic review and meta-analysis of Supera interwoven nitinol stents for the treatment of infrainguinal peripheral arterial disease

A multicenter prospective observational study appraising the effectiveness of the Supera stent after subintimal recanalization of femoro-popliteal artery occlusion: The SUPERSUB II study

BACKGROUND

Complex femoropopliteal artery disease represents a challenge. The Supera stent holds the promise of improving the results of endovascular therapy for complex femoropopliteal disease.

AIMS

We aimed at appraising the early and long-term effectiveness of the Supera stent after successful subintimal angioplasty (SuperSUB strategy) for complex femoropopliteal lesions.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, prospective, single-arm observational study including consecutive patients at participating centers in whom Supera was implanted after successful subintimal angioplasty for complex femoropopliteal lesions.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients were included Femoropopliteal arteries were the most common target, and lesion length was 261 ± 102 mm. Most procedures were technically demanding, with antegrade femoral access in 35 (38%) and retrograde distal access in 55 (60%). Supera stent length was 281 ± 111 mm, with 4, 5, and 6 mm devices being most commonly used: 32 (35%), 35 (38%), and 23 (25%), respectively. Technical success was achieved in 100% of subjects, as was clinical success (per subject), whereas procedural success (per subject) was obtained in 98%. At 24 months, freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization was 93%, whereas primary patency was 87%. When compared with a similar historical cohort, Supera stent use appeared to be associated with a reduction in resources.

CONCLUSION

Use of Supera stent after successful subintimal recanalization of complex lower limb arterial lesions yields favorable procedural results, which are maintained over follow-up, and are associated also with a favorable resource use profile.

Stenting performs better than drug-coated balloon angioplasty in popliteal lesions

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a common and highly morbid disease. Although there have been recent advancements in the endovascular modalities to treat PAD, comparisons of these strategies, especially in the popliteal region, remain underinvestigated. The objective of this study was to compare midterm outcomes in patients with PAD undergoing treatment with both novel and SS compared with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty.

METHODS

All patients at a multi-institution health system treated for PAD in the popliteal region from 2011 to 2019 were identified. Presenting features, operative details, and outcomes were included in the analysis. Patients who underwent popliteal revascularization with stents were compared with DCB. SS were compared separately with novel dedicated stents. Two-year primary patency was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

We included 408 patients (72.7 ± 11.8 years old; 57.1% men) in the analysis. There were 221 (54.7%) patients who underwent popliteal stenting and 187 (45.3%) who underwent popliteal DCB. There were high rates of tissue loss in both groups (57.9% vs 50.8%; P = .14). Stented patients had longer lesions (112.4 ± 3.2 vs 100.2 ± 5.8 mm; P = .03) and higher rates of concomitant superficial femoral artery treatment (88.2% vs 39.6%; P < .01). Chronic total occlusions accounted for the majority of lesions treated (stent 62.4%, DCB 64.2%). Perioperative complications were similar between groups. Primary patency for the stented group was higher at two years than the DCB group (61.0% vs 46.1%; P = .03). When evaluating stented patients only, SS had higher 2-year patency than novel stents in the popliteal segment (69.6% vs 51.4%; P = .04). On multivariable analysis, stenosis, as opposed to chronic total occlusion, was associated with improved patency (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.96; P = .04), whereas novel stents were associated with worse primary patency (hazard ratio, 2.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-3.73; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

In a population of patients with severe vascular disease, stents do not have inferior patency and limb salvage rates compared with DCB angioplasty when treating the popliteal region. For patients with advanced vascular disease, and especially tissue loss, stents and DCB are both beneficial when treating popliteal lesions.